Kentucky Center For Smoke-Free Policy E-Mails Part 5

Spagnuolo, Amy R
From: Johnson, John D

Sent:
To:
Tuesday, March 15, 2011 9:24 AM
Hahn, Ellen J; Marijanovic, Nina
Cc:
Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E; Sidney, Hilarie E
Subject: RE: [Smokefree-Talkj greenwashing royale, or "Keep America Smoking ... Beautiful!!"
Yes, absolutely. I think at this point most large corporations, especially the ones who are engaged in business that is
profitable and also shady, are engaged in these practices. This happens a lot in oil- BP being a good example.
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 7:43 AM
To: Johnson, John D; Marijanovic, Nina
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E; Sidney, Hilarie E
Subject: RE: [Smokefree-Talk] greenwashing royale, or "Keep America Smoking ... Beautiful!!"
Good caution. However, if you look at the history ofthe PM front groups, you will see that they have a long history of
supporting 'good' socially responsible causes like this one. The goal may be more one of garnering credibility than
actually promoting smoking. If you read the tobacco documents, you will see that this is one of their key strategies. For
example, PM funds the Community Action Council in Bowling Green. If you look at their website you see absolutely
nothing about tobacco promotion or tobacco control. However, the funding link does enough to create a subtle pro-
tobacco link through doing 'good things' as a good corporate citizen. Beware of KAB!!
Ellen
Ellen J. Hahn, PhD, RN
Professor and Director, Tobacco Policy Research Program
Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy
Assistant Director, Center for Biobehavioral Research in Self-Management of Cardiopulmonary Disease
University of Kentucky
College of Nursing and College of Public Health
751 Rose Street
Lexington, KY 40536-0232
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
ejhahnOO@email.uky.edu
www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicy
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmoke/ree on and
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 3:52 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Marijanovic, Nina
1
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E; Sidney, Hi)arie E
Subject: RE: [Smokefree-Talk] greenwashing royale, or "Keep America Smoking ... Beautiful!!"
Yes, I've been looking at this site. I do have a somewhat different read on it, however. While some of the things that
KAB encourages may have the (I would argue) latent consequence of promoting the continuation of smoking (ashtrays
on golf carts and pocket ash-trays, for example), these efforts seem to be a small part of their purpose. Their
overarching purpose is litter prevention, not tobacco control, so it wouldn't necessarily be reasonable for them to work
toward tobacco control. We may be able to convince them that tobacco control is consistent with their mission to
create healthy communities, but we'd probably have to wait until their grant funding from Phillip Morris runs out. It
seems most of their work is to prevent and clean up litter and developing urban green spaces.
This very comprehensive study they did was funded by Phillip Morris, and I'm sure Morris is using KAB to get as much
mileage out of this effort to encourage litter control while also encouraging the status quo in tobacco consumption. I
don't think, however, this organization fits the typical profile of an opposition group that we encounter.
The contacts listed on the KAB website are waste management people and volunteer coordinators for community
improvement efforts and seem to have no clear connection to tobacco promotion. If we do write an opposition piece
on this I think we need to be careful about how we link the actions and motives of KAB to those of the tobacco industry.
It seems to me that the email from the smoke-free listserve goes too far in making those connections and makes a
number of assertions that seem to be not only unscientific, but quite reactionary and borderline libel. I'm certainly open
to correction on that.
I don't think it is wrong to address the aspect of these efforts that support the status quo of tobacco consumption, but I
just wanted to offer a bit of caution here. I hope that makes sense and doesn't come across like I'm being funded by
Phillip Morris.
John
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 7:29 AM
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E; Sidney, Hilarie E
Subject: FW: [Smokefree-Talk] greenwashing royale, or "Keep America Smoking ... Beautiful!!"
John,
I cc: you on an email re Keep Lex Beautiful-here is the notice I got about it. We need to put this in the April newsletter
for sure!! Monica and Hilarie-another group to monitor in KY. Look at the map at the KAB website and see that there
are about four KY contacts. Need to keep a watch on those websites. Interesting that one site is in Hopkinsville and one
in Covington ....
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
2
www.kcsp.uky.edu
sp
_#ll'oIi<y Find kysmokejree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our Gool i ~ to Help You Reolim 'yburs
From: smokefree-talk@googlegroups.com [mailto:smokefree-talk@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of tim@timfiller.com
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 12:20 AM
To: bronson.frick@no-smoke.org
Cc: smokefree-talk@googlegroups.com
Subject: [Smokefree-Talk] greenwashing royale, or "Keep America Smoking ... Beautiful!!"
That little 10 project deal is just a starter greenwash campaign, but doesn't hold a candle to the King Daddy of
tobacco industry greenwash campaigns funded by both Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds through Keep America
Beautiful. And through KAB, hundreds oflocal "Keep Beautiful" municipal organizations are
serving the interests of the tobacco industry to reinforce and institutionalize smoking, minimize the issues
associated with public smoking, downplay the hanu of tobacco product litter and to give legitimacy to tobacco
companies as civic partners.
10 locations should be considered small fries compared with the 240 grant projects across the country KAB had
last year. What the Marlboro project does say is that KAB has been such a success at no cost to smoking
consumption that it is safe to attach the largest domestic tobacco brand's name to the project. (Kinda like how
they test marketed snus under the brand name Taboka, a throwaway brand name, until it tested safe enough--i
mean "safe" in tenus of consumer opinion and whether the pUblic/consumers would react positively or
negatively to it, not safe as im not hazardous to human health--to brand it as a part of the Marlboro family of
products.
Read this press release below from one month ago to find out how much Keep America Beatiful is fronting for
Big Tobacco. Also, learn how their local projects--probably including one near you--are serving the tobacco
industry'S objectives.
KAB's answer to tobacco product litter?
1. What litter?
2. Ashtrays
3. Signage
4. Ashtrays
5. Personal pocket ashtrays
6. Self-promotion
I can almost hear it now, because hear it at every council meeting ... we don't need a smokefree law, cuz we have
these signs.
Love this part of the press release, a quote from a grantee in Akron:
"Our ambassadors were also proactive in distributing pocket ashtrays to smokers within our downtown, which
proved effective."
3
Did you know your city was installing signage and ashtrays and handing out merchandising to the smoking on
behalf of RJ Reynolds and Philip Morris?
Some guy who is charge of Keep Greater Peachville Beautiful (not the real group name, but its somewhere in
GA. I'm still getting used to scrolling on this phone so I'm trying to do so as little as possible to just finish this
message), conveniently downplays all of this hoo-ha about tobacco litter by saying, basically, it lets them focus
on the big litter picture (he might as well hav ed said "real litter.") "While focusing on the littering ofa product
that most people don ~ even consider litter, we are finding that it brings a greater focus to litter overall."
Hey, KEEP AMERICA BEAUTIFUL. .. news flash!! You didn ~ reduce the amount oftobacco litter at all, much
less by 42 %. You just picked it up and took it out of the public view, we sure was nice of you all to do so the
concerned public would be a little less concerned about tobacco waste. There still was just as much tobacco
waste created in these project cities, which along we with heart disease, cancer, respiratory illness and infant
mortality are the long-felt after effects of tobacco products.
But, seriously, d o n ~ twist up results that KAB picked up some of the dirty, toxic by-product discarded by
tobacco consumers and mistake that for the idea that somehow any less tobacco product waste exists now
because of it. There is no less tobacco product waste because of KAB it just may not be seen or noticed as much
around you downtown. A real enviromnental program, not just a "beautification" program, would seek to
actually reduce the amount of tobacco product waste, and this can be accomplished quite simply by supporting
policies that reduce tobacco use, like comprehensive smokefree we workplace laws and higher excise taxes for
cigarettes and other tobacco products. Fewer people using tobacco would result in lower amounts of tobacco
product waste.
I'm sure if you ask your local project, they11 say th as t they're different, they're not like some of those other
projects, they don ~ have anything to do with their national funding source or tobacco companies. Just start
reading this news release to them real slowly and clearly, and if they try to claim it again, just start again at the
top.
Here's the KAB press release in it's full glory:
. Keep America Beautiful Reports 42 % Cigarette Litter Reduction in National Grassroots Program
-Results show reductions in litter increase over time when program is sustained -
STAMFORD, Conn., Feb. 10, 2011IPRNewswire-USNewswire/ --Keep America Beautiful (KAB) reports that
in 2010 there was an average 42 percent reduction of cigarette litter in the communities implementing KAB's
Cigarette Litter Prevention Program (CLPP).
The nation's largest program aimed at reducing cigarette litter is in its eighth year. In 2010 there were 240 grant-
funded implementations across the country including downtowns, roadways, beaches, parks, marinas,
colleges/universities, tourist spots, and at special events.
In addition, a 2010 "sustainability survey" of21 communities implementing the Cigarette Litter Prevention
Program over multiple (1-4) years showed these communities are sustaining and even increasing their program
impact over time, with an average reduction in cigarette butt litter of 63 percent. Data validates the long-term
value of strategically-placed ash receptacles and ongoing public education, including signage. "
Changing ingrained behaviors, such as littering, requires a long-term and sustained commitment," says Matthew
4
M. McKenna, president and CEO of Keep America Beautiful, Inc. "We're clearly seeing evidence that the
longer a community focuses on anti-litter education programs, the more successful their efforts will be."
Tobacco products, including cigarette butts, are the most-littered item in America, representing nearly 38
percent of all items, according to "Litter in America," KAB's landmark 2009 study of litter and littering
behavior. In response to this long-standing issue, KAB developed the CLPP with funding from Philip Morris
USA, an Altria company. In 2010, the program received additional support from Reynolds American Inc.
Services Company. Since its inception, the program has been implemented in nearly 800 U.S. communities.
"We've found the impact ofthis program is profound," says Frank Adams, executive director, Keep Chatsworth-
Murray (Ga.) Beautiful.
"While focusing on the littering of a product that most people dont even consider litter, we are finding that it
brings a greater focus to litter overall."
Research has shown that even self-reported "non-litterers" often don t consider tossing cigarette butts on the
ground to be "littering." Keep America Beautiful has found that cigarette butt litter occurs most often at
transition points-areas where a person must stop smoking before proceeding into another area. These include
bus stops, entrances to stores and public buildings, and the sidewalk areas outside of bars and restaurants,
among others.
To address cigarette butt litter, KAB's Cigarette Litter Prevention Program recommends communities integrate
four proven approaches:
*encourage enforcement of litter laws, including cigarette litter;
*raise awareness about the issue using public service messages;
*place ash receptacles at transition points such as entrances to public buildings; and
*distribute pocket, or portable ashtrays to adult smokers.
"Our cigarette butt count showed a nearly 80 percent reduction following the purchase and placement of
cigarette receptacles in the target areas," says Linda Fry,Downtown Akron Partnership, Akron, Ohio.
"Our ambassadors were also proactive in distributing pocket ashtrays to smokers within our downtown, which
proved effective."
"Our efforts showed that a minor, inexpensive change like adding ashtrays to golf carts could make a large
difference. We saw a 73 percent decrease in cigarette butt litter in the parking lots, around the golf bag stations,
and on the course," says Carolyn Tomlinson, Keep Dorchester County (S .c.) Beautiful.
The "Guide to Cigarette Litter Prevention" provides information about starting and maintaining a Cigarette
Litter Prevention Program in your community, and can be found online at www.PreventCigaretteLitter.org.
About Keep America Beautiful, Inc.
Keep America Beautiful, Inc., established in 1953, is the nation's largest volunteer-based community action and
education organization. With a network of over 1,200 affiliates and participating organizations, Keep America
Beautiful forms public-private partnerships and programs that engage individuals to take greater responsibility
for improving their community'S environment. To learn more, visit www.kab.org.
CONTACTS Robert Wallace/Larry Kaufman Tel: 203.659.3016 / 203.659.3014
5
Sent from myTouch 4G
----- Reply message -----
From: "Bronson Frick" 4Jronson.frick@no-smoke.org>
To: <smokefree-talk@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [Smokefree-Talk] Fwd: Be on the Lookout for the New "Team Marlboro" Campaign
Date: Fri, Mar 11,2011 7:02 pm
Marlboro's new environmental greenwashing campaign ... yee-hah.
From: Serena Chen <SChen@alac.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar201122:45:53 -10000
Subject: Be on the Lookout for the New "Team Marlboro" Campaign
gn
Be on the Lookout for the New "Team Marlboro" Campaign
With its new "Team Marlboro" campaign, Phillip Morris is taking an
environmental strategy approach and trying to position itself as pro-environment,
despite greatly contributing to a huge toxic waste problem that cigarette litter
causes. Cigarette butts are the most common form oflitter on California beaches.
Discarded in parks, along sidewalks, and on roadways, cigarette butts inevitably
make their way through storm drains, creeks, and rivers to our beaches and the
ocean where they leak dangerous chemicals into our watershed. They contain
toxic chemicals, which are not biodegradable and persist in the environment for a
very long time. Cigarette butts have been found in the stomachs of fish, birds,
whales, and other wildlife who mistake them for food. Additionally, cigarette
butts can cause fires and cost taxpayers millions of dollars to clean up each year.
6
"Team Marlboro" is sending out a message that they are looking to preserve the
American West by restoring rivers, protecting wildlife, and rebuilding trails.
However, to tmly protect wildlife and restore rivers, "Team Marlboro" should
quit smoking!
To enter the "Team Marlboro" contest, you have to be an eligible smoker 21 +and
submit a short ISO-word essay and a video. Marlboro will select 100 people to
participate in 10 different projects in the West. The efforts will last one week, all
expenses will be paid, and each participant will receive a check for $6000 upon
successful completion of the project.
Philip Morris and "Team Marlboro" are not pro-environment! Please be on the
lookout for any such efforts in your community and if you see evidence of
Marlboro support oflocal environmental organizations, please contact
Linda.Campbell@cdph.ca.gov .
Serena
Serena Chen
Policy Advocacy Director
American Lung Association in California
424 Pendleton Way
Oakland, CA 94621
(510) 638-5864, x303
A The American Lung Association in California State of Tobacco Control
2010 report is now available
7
************************************************
Bronson Frick
Associate Director
Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights
2530 San Pablo Ave., Ste. J
Berkeley, CA 94702
510 .841.3032 office
510.932.1109 mobile
bronson.frick@no-smoke.org
www.no-smoke.org
Twitter:@ANR_Smokefree
Are you a member of ANR? If not, please join us today. Our work depends on members like you!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smokeftee-talk" group.
To post to this group, send email tosmokeftee-talk@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email tosmokeftee-talk-lunsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/smokefree-talk?hl=en.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smokefree-talk" group.
To post to this group, send email tosmokefree-talk@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email tosmokefree-talk-lt!nsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/smokefree-talk?hl=en.
8
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From: Kercsmar, Sarah
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Monday, March 14, 2011 1 :34 PM
Hahn, Ellen J; Mundy, Monica E
Robertson, Heather E
Subject: RE: Jum p drive
The What's Happening attached to the previous email is a good one to put on the jump drive.
Thanks,
Sarah
Sarah E. Kercsmar, PhD
Faculty Lecturer, Division of Instructional Communication College of Communications and Information
Studies, Little Library 310 M Co-Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy College of Nursing, 751
Rose Street, 450B, Lexington, KY 40536-0232
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
scave2@email.uky.edu
www.mc.uky .edu/tobaccopolicy
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter and Facebook !
-----Original Message-----
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Monday, March 14,201112:06 PM
To: Mundy, Monica E
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah; Robertson, Heather E
Subject: RE: Jump drive
A few observations about the jump drive:
1. NKY Case Study--remove Powerpoint file and put the Campaign Timeline (when Michelle sends it) in the
Handouts section. Let's add one of the What's Happening Ads to the jump. I like the attached. Sarah, do you
agree?
2. Opposition--again, remove the PPT file and put all documents in the Handouts file since we won ~ have a PPT
for this session (only the video which we can ~ share with them). Just put the wordle document when completed
in the Handouts section.
3. Social Networking--there really a r e n ~ handouts but there is a video to accompany the PPT. Do you want to
name the subfolder Video vs. Handouts? I will review that today on sharepoint and approve. I have approved
the PPT but I don ~ see it there yet:)
4. Surgeon General--I changed the names of the handout files (you had them reversed) and corrected a typo in
the file name. Amanda was to tweak my slides in PPT. I will check to see if she has done that yet.
1
5. Public Speaking--The public presentation is password protected. Do we really want to do that on the jump
drive? I can \ get into it because I don \ have the password. Is it the most recent version (I think Janelle updated
the map recently).
6. Coalitions--I cannot open the link to 'Guide to Coalition Building '--what is that? It seems to want to take me
to our radon website (HahnGroup is very slow from home today so maybe that is why I am having trouble).
7. Awards--The map is landscape vs. portrait. Please make sure it is portrait. Also, let's put the list of
community awards on the jump drive, as we have it for the media packet.
8. Branding--with the .pdfversion of the PPTs, the animation covers up the content (see slide 4)--can that be
fixed?
9. Ordinances vs. Regulations--I noticed on the last slide that there seems to be a space between Wood and ford
(Woodford) in the title. Can you please fix that? As I mentioned in a previous email, I never heard back after
sending to Alan George and reminding him, so can you please try to get in touch with him to be sure he is good
with these?
10. SHS and Air Pollution--we need to remove the two articles from the handouts section (we don\ have
permission to use them). The e-cig one pager has not date on it (?). Please put the date in the title of the file.
11. Health Dept Panel--Change the name of the third handout to 'Guidelines Public Health Advocates APHA'
(vs. workplace rules guidelines).
12. Other Conference Documents--Please replace the KCSP contact sheet with the revised version sent this AM.
Under Journal articles, I am having trouble opening two of these files; plus we don\ have permission to put
journal articles on the jump (except for one article from AJPH--see previous email from today). So I would omit
the section named Journal articles and just include the AJPH one as separate and other ones in there aren \ really
journal articles. We don't have permission for the breast cancer one. I am happy to talk with you about the other
files in the file named Journal articles and what to name them.
13. I don't see the agenda on the jump. I noticed a final 3/11 version on HahnGroup that you can copy into the
jump.
14. Under Bios, you don\ need a subfolder since there is only one file in it. This is the first time I am seeing the
KCSP Staff Bios. I made a few tweaks ... can you be sure all the hyperlinks for web links and emails are in the
file--some are, some aren \. I assume the Speaker bios will also be on the jump drive under the same folder.
Where are those?
Professor and Director, Tobacco Policy Research Program Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy
University of Kentucky College of Nursing and College of Public Health
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
ejhahnOO@ernail.uky.edu
2
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on and
From: Mundy, Monica E
Sent: Monday, March 14,2011 8:15 AM
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Cc: Begley, Kathy
SUbject: Jump drive
Hi Dr. Hahn,
Did you get a chance to review the jump drive this weekend?
Thanks,
Monica
Monica E. Mundy, MPH
Staff Associate
Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy
3
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Thursday, March 10, 2011 7:52 AM
Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: RE: Update
Sure, happy to. The way I was looking at it was that if she volunteered to work on something, I didn ~ want to
decrease the motivation, especially given our issues. But, I can just say that I goofed and since we're going to
get the newsletter out ASAP, we'll just finish it up -- .
As for the VFW, I think she was going to start all over, so I'm not sure that there 11 be anything for us to work
from. Given that she's struggled so much with it, I'd really like her to keep working on the VFW one-pager,
even if it ends up not being something we use widely.
Sarah
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Thursday, March 10,2011 6:46 AM
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: Update
Not sure it makes sense for her to be working on this out ofthe office. Plus, we may need the VFW one pager
for Jessamine before she returns. When will she get back? Did we decide that we would send the newsletter out
AFTER spring conference? Please remind me. Given our issues with Nina, I really think we need to change our
minds and NOT ask her to work when she is gone. Do you mind sending that email so it doesn't look like we
are in disagreement?
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www .kcsp .uky.edu
[cid:image006 jpg@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000] <http://www .kcsp .uky .edu/ >Find kysmokefree on
[cid:image007 .png@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000] <http://twitter.comlkysmokefree> and
[cid:image008 .png@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000]
<http://www.facebook.comlpageslkysmokefree/121589417877279?ref=4S >
[cid:image009 .gif@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 7:43 PM
To: Marijanovic, Nina; Mundy, Monica E; Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E
1
Cc: Johnson, John D
Subject: RE: Update
Nina,
I'm fine with you working on the newsletter and the VFW one-pager while you'regone .. .ifyou want to. We
don't expect folks to work when they aren't at work - especially out of the country!
Either way, safe travels.
Sarah
Faculty Lecturer, Division of Instructional Communication College of Communications and fuformation
Studies, Little Library 310M Co-Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy College of Nursing, 751
Rose Street, 450B, Lexington, KY 40536-0232
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
scave2@email.uky.edu <ejhahnOO@email.uky.edu >
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter <http://www.twitter.com/kysmokefree >and
Facebook <http://wwwJacebook.com/#!/pages/kysmokefree/121589417877279?ref =ts >!
From: Marijanovic, Nina
To: Mundy, Monica E; Hahn, EllenJ; Robertson, HeatherE
Cc: Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: Update
Username: ad\nma228
Password: SOuthKOr3a (if you need to get into my email)
Registration Excel file is under KCSP/SpringConference20 II/Spring Registered (most updated version is on
there, labeled 030911; total number in attendance with KCSP +.Speakers -!Attendees = 120 [Yay for the big
room!]) My email away message/telephone voicemail has your [Monical email contact only if the
correspondence pertains to Spring Conference.
Emergency supply box is by your [Monical desk on the floor. Has a packing slip of what's in the box.
Emailed the outstanding speakers for bios: Jim Gray, Westrom, Heise, Robinson, Stevens (?) Kirschling (?)
Newsletter: added the literature reviews, still looking for a new opposition angle, rather than CASAA on e-cigs.
Newsletter is under KCSPlNewsletter Summaries/March NewsletterlMarch Newsletter Dl
Questions: Can I take the Newsletter work and VFW one-pagers on the road with me, or would you
prefer that that stay here until I return?
MISSING JUMP DRNE STUFF:
1. MICHELLE EVERSOLE'S TIMELINE FOR NKY STUDY
2. OPPOSITION: WORDLE
2
3. SOCIAL NETWORKING: FINALIZING DOCS
4. SG'S REPORT: DR. HAHN'S PPT.
5. PUBLIC SPEAKING: PPT?
6. COALITIONS: DONE
7. AQ:DONE
8. AWARDS: DONE
9. BRANDING: DONE
10. FAITH: DONE
11. ORDINANCE V. REGULATIONS: PPT SLIDES
12. HEALTH DEPARTMENT PANEL: DONE
13. STATE AND LOCAL: DONE (QUICK FACTS? STILL PENDING)
14. MISC: YOUTH STUFF IN THERE; NEW PAPERS (?) (PENDING)
I fly out tomorrow morning at 4:00am. I will check my email before I sleep for a bit, so if you have any further
questions or comments, please email me or telephone 270.799.6147.
Nina Marijanovic, Research Assistant
College of Nursing
519 CON Building
859.323.4599
nina.marijanovic@uky.edu
[cid:imageOlO jpg@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000] <http://www .kcsp .uky .edu/ ::Find kysmokefree on
[cid:image007 .png@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000] <http://twitter.com/kysmokefree> and
[cid:image008 .png@0ICBDEEE.DDC44000]
<http://wwwJacebook.com/pages/kysmokefree/121589417877279?ref =ts >
3
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From: Sidney, Hilarie E
Sent:
To:
Wednesday, March 09, 2011 10:00 AM
Begley, Kathy
Subject: RE: article cost
Attachments: Bibliography 030911.docx
Hi Kathy,
Would you take a look at this and see ifthis is what she wanted? I don't really know, being the least scholarly person in
the department!
If you think it is correct, what should it be titled?
Thanks!
Hilarie
From: Hahn, Ellen J
To: Robertson, Heather E; Sidney, Hilarie E; Begley, Kathy
Subject: Re: article cost
After seeing the others, let's only include the bibliography with whatever links take them to where they can purchase the
paper. Most paper abstracts are available for free
Ellen J. Hahn, PhD
Professor, UK CON
859-257-2358
From: Robertson, Heather E
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Sidney, Hilarie E; Begley, Kathy
Sent: Tue Mar 08 09:58:52 2011
Hi Ellen,
As you know, our conference budget was over long ago. If we do provide full papers on the jump, those funds will have
to come from an open research account (our own pot of funds). I'm okay with doing that if you think it is worth it. And I
definitely agree with Ellen, it appears this one paper is $76 so I would definitely want to know the cost for ALL papers.
Also, it doesn't appear that the $76 fee includes placing it on our website. We would need to know what additional cost
that would be.
Thanks,
J{eatfier iJW6ertson, :NiP}!
Clean Indoor Air Partnership, Manager and
Program Administrator
Kentucky Radon Awareness Program
College of Nursing
520 CON Building
751 Rose Street
1
Lexington KY 40536-0232
859-323-1730
Fax: 859-323-1057
HRobertson@uky.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
To: Sidney, Hilarie E; Begley, Kathy
Cc: Robertson, Heather E
The question is how much it will cost for all of these to put them on our website and the jump .... Heather, what do you
think? I am wondering if we just type up the citation list and put that on their jump drive vs. giving them all of these? If
you think they will be useful, we can do it, but I would like to see how much it will cost in total for us to supply these
papers on the jump. Heather, your thoughts?
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
! ! ; - ~
~ ~
_ ..... """" Find kysmoke/ree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our Goolls to i101p You !"\oallzll '!bur;;
From: Sidney, Hilarie E
Sent: Monday, March 07, 201110:16 AM
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Begley, Kathy
. Subject: FW: article cost
2
From: O'malley, Gail A
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 10:03 AM
To: Sidney, Hilarie E
Subject: article cost
copyright
Clearance
Center
Review Order

Title:
Author:
Air quality in and around airport
enclosed smoking rooms:
Kiyoung Lee, Ellen J. Hahn,
Heather E. Robertson, Laura
Whitten, Laura K. Jones,
Brendan Zahn
Publication: Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 06/01/2010
Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press
Please review the order details and the associated terms and conditions.
LIcensed content Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Logged in as:
Gail O'Malley
Licensed content
author
Kiyoung Lee, Ellen J. Hahn, Heather E. Robertson, Laura Whitten, Laura K. Jones, Brendan Zahn
Order reference
number
Publisher of new
Total
Edit Order Details
Kentucky Center for Smoke Free Policy
76.00 USD
3
I agree to these terms and conditions.
I understand this license is for reuse only and that obtaining the content is a separate transaction
not involving Rightslink.
Customer Code (if supplied) APPLY
BACK DECLINE CHOOSE PAYMENT
Copyright 2011 Copyright Clearance Center. Inc. AI! Rights Reserved. Privacy statement.
Comments? We would like to hear from you. E-mail usatcustomercare@copyright.com
4
Noland, M., Rayens, MK, Riggs, R.S., Staten, R., Hahn, E., & Riker, C. (2011). Student and
principal perceptions of school tobacco policy. American Journal of Health Education, 42(1),
41-49.
http :lfwww.ingentaconnect.com/content/aah perd/aj he/2011 /00000042/0000000 1 /art00006
Fernander, A., Rayens, M.K., Hahn, E.J., & Zhang, M. (2010). Menthol smoking, smoke-free
policies, and cessation services. Addiction, 105(Suppi. 1), 105-114.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21059141
Ashford, K.B., Peden, A.R., Hahn, E.J., Rayens, M.K., & Hall, L.A. (2011). Postpartum smoking
abstinence and smoke-free environments. Health Promotion Practice, 12(1),126-134.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Postpartum%20smoking%20abstinence%20and%2
Osmoke-free%20environments
York, N.L., Rayens, M.K., Zhang, M., Jones, L.G., Casey, B.R., & Hahn, E.J. (2010). Strength of
tobacco control in rural communities. Journal of Rural Health, 26, 120-128.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Strength%20of%20tobacco%20control%20in%20rur
al%20communities
Pyles, M., & Hahn, E.J. (2010). Economic effects of Ohio's smoke-free law on Kentucky and
Ohio border counties. Tobacco Control. doi: 10.1136/tc.2009.035493.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Economic%20effects%20of%200hio%27s%20smok
e-free%20Iaw%20on%20Kentucky%20and%200hio%20border%20counties
Lee, K., Hahn, E.J., Robertson, H.E., Whitten, L., Jones, LK, & Zahn, B. (2010). Air quality in
and around airport enclosed smoking rooms. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. doi:
10.1093/ntr/ntq054.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Air%20quality%20in%20and%20around%20airport
%20enciosed%20smoking%20rooms
Hahn, E.J., Rayens, M.K., Ridner, S.L., Butler, K., Zhang, M., & Staten, R.R. (2010). Smoke-
free laws and smoking and drinking among college students. Journal of Community Health.
doi: 10.1007/510900-010-9220-2.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Smoke-
free%20Iaws%20and%20smoking%20and%20drinking%20among%2Ocollege%20students
Hahn, E.J. (2010). Smoke-free legislation: A review of health and economic outcomes research.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 39(6S1), S66-S76.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Smoke-
free%20Iegislation%3A%20A%20review%20of%20health%20and%20economic%20outcom
es%20research
Hahn, E.J., York, N.L., & Rayens, M.K. (2010). Smoke-free legislation in Appalachian
communities. American Journal of Public Health. 10.21 05/ajph.201 0.202119.
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/contentlfuIl/1 00/11/2012
Spagnuolo, Amy R
To:
Cc:
Marijanovic, Nina; Mundy, Monica E; Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E
Johnson, John 0
Subject: RE: Update
Nina,
I'm fine with you working on the newsletter and the VFW one-pager while you're gone ... if you want to. We don't expect
folks to work when they aren't at work - especially out of the countryl
Either way, safe travels.
Sarah
Faculty Lecturer, Division of Instructional Communication
College of Communications and Information Studies, Little Library 310 M
CO-Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy
College of Nursing, 751 Rose Street, 450B, Lexington, KY 40536-0232
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
scave2@email.ukv.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter and Facebook I
To: Mundy, Monica E; Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E
Subject: Update
Username: ad\nma228
Password: SOuthKOr3a (if you need to get into my email)
Registration Excel file is under KCSP/SpringConference2011/Spring Registered (most updated version is on there, labeled 030911;
total number in attendance with KCSP+Speakers+Attendees; 120 [Yay for the big room I])
My email away message/telephone voicemail has your [Monica] email contact only if the correspondence pertains to Spring
Conference.
Emergency supply box is by your [Monica] desk on the floor. Has a packing slip of what's in the box.
Emailed the outstanding speakers for bios: Jim Gray, Westrom, Heise, Robinson, Stevens (?) Kirschling (?)
Newsletter: added the literature reViews, still looking for a new opposition angle, rather than CASAA on e-cigs. Newsletter is under
KCSP /Newsletter Summaries/March Newsletter/March Newsletter D1
Questions: Can I take the Newsletter work and VFW one-pagers on the road with me, or would you prefer that that stay
here until I return?
MISSING JUMP DRIVE STUFF:
1. MICHELLE EVERSOLE'S TIMELINE FOR NKY STUDY
2. OPPOSITION: WORDlE
1
3. SOCIAL NETWORKING: FINALIZING DOCS
4. SG'S REPORT: DR. HAHN'S PPT.
5. PUBLIC SPEAKING: PPT?
6. COALITIONS: DONE
7. AQ: DONE
8. AWARDS: DONE
9. BRANDING: DONE
10. FAITH: DONE
11. ORDINANCE V. REGULATIONS: PPT SLIDES
12. HEALTH DEPARTMENT PANEL: DONE
13. STATE AND LOCAL: DONE (QUICK FACTS? STILL PENDING)
14. MISC: YOUTH STUFF IN THERE; NEW PAPERS (?) (PENDING)
I fly out tomorrow morning at 4:00am. I will check my email before I sleep for a bit, so if you have any further questions or
comments, please email me or telephone 270.799.6147.
College of Nursing
519 CON Building
859.323.4599
nina.mariianovic@uky.edu
l!fsp
$In>I,.'t1'<!i<f Find kysmokejree on and
2
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
From: O'malley, Gail A
Sidney, Hilarie E
Monday, March 07, 2011 10:16 AM
Hahn, Ellen J; Begley, Kathy
FW: article cost
Sent: Monday, March 07, 201110:03 AM
To: Sidney, Hilarie E
Subject: article cost
Copyright
Clearance
Center
Review Order
Rights ink@
Title:
Author:
Air quality in and around airport
enclosed smoking rooms:
Kiyoung Lee, Ellen J. Hahn,
Heather E. Robertson, Laura
Whitten, Laura K. Jones,
Brendan Zahn
Publication: Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 06/01/2010
Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press
Please review the order details and the associated terms and conditions.
Licensed content Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Logged in as!
Gail O'Malley
Licensed content
author
Klyoung Lee, Ellen J. Hahn, Heather E. Robertson, Laura Whitten, Laura K. Jones, Brendan Zahn
Order reference
number
Pu blisher of new
CO/OVD
Kentucky Center for Smoke Free Policy
1
Total 76.00 USD
Edit Order Details
I agree to these terms and conditions.
I understand this license is for reuse only and that obtaining the content is a separate transaction
not involving Rightslink.
Customer Code (if supplied)
BACK DECL1NI;; OHOOSE PAVMENT
Copyright 2011 Copyright Clearance Center. Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy statement,
Comments? We would like to hear from you. E-mail usatcustomercare@cooyright.com
2
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 8:56 AM
To:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Kercsmar, Sarah; Riker, Carol A; Mundy, Monica E
FW: Google Alert - kentucky smoking
From: Google Alerts [mailto:googlealerts-noreply@google.comj
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 12:34 PM
To: Johnson,John D
Subject: Google Alert - kentucky smoking
News
Kentucky smoking ban stalls: But Watkins will oy again
Evansville Courier & Press
4 new results for kentucky smoking
The bill would have prohibited smoking in all public places and places of employment. It failed to get out of committee this year. As
the bill was being introduced, the Smoke-Free Kentncky coalition released a poll that indicated that 59 percent of ...
tQpic _.
Health board in Madison County discusses proposal to ban electronic cigarettes
1110 Republic
AP RICHMOND, Ky. - A central Kentucky city is mulling a proposal to take its smoking bao a step further by prohibiting
electronic cigarettes. The proposal by the Madison County Board of Health has drawn varied reactions, with some snpporting the ...
See all stories on this topic
Study: Jessamine's indoor air pollution much higher than Lexington's
Lexington Herald Leader
The findings were released Friday, just as local govermnents in Nicholasville, Wilmore aod Jessamine County are about to discnss an
ordinance to ban smoking in workplaces aod restauraots but not bars. That exemption for bars came under criticism from ...
all thj.191U<::..'c
Utah parents light up, kids with asthma head to the ER
Salt Lake Tribune
By heather may You might think you were in a tobacco-producing state like West Virginia or Kentucky - not almost smoke-free
Utah - judging by the number of parents who light up yet have children who end up in the emergency room for asthma ....
Sec all stories on this topic .
Web 1 new result for kentucky smoking
Tobacco Companies Fire Back On Government-Proposed Ads ILEX18.com ...
LEXINGTON, KENTUCKY I COVERAGE YOU CAN COUNT ON ... proposed corrective statements about the dangers of
smoking are inflammatory and inaccurate ....
www.lex18.eom/ ... /tobaceo-eompanies-fire-back-oD-govermD ...
Tip: Use a minus sign (-) in front of terms in your query that you want to exclude. Learn more.
Remove this alert.
Create another alert.
Manage your alerts.
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Johnson, John D
Monday, March 07, 2011 8:35 AM
Hahn, Ellen J; Kercsmar, Sarah
From: Google Alerts [mailto:googlealerts-noreply@google.coml
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 12:33 PM
To: Johnson, John D
News
Tobacco taxes help Illinois schools
Danville Commercial News
1 new result for kentucky smoking
Tax rates for the rest of Illinois' neighbors are: 60 cents in Kentucky, which ranks 40th; and $1.36 per pack in Iowa, which ranks 25th
highest in the nation. Toss in the federal cigarette tax of $1.01 per pack, and the charges really start to add up ....

Web
Altria doesn expect to see tobacco production decline in Ky ...
In 2010, Philip Morris USA and U.S. Smokeless Tobacco bought more than 50 million pounds of tobacco from more than 2000
Keutucky growers ....
see kingalp ha ,co mi .. .1697 634-al tria -doesn-t -expect -t 0-sec-to ba . ".
Kentucky City Mulls Ban On E-Cigarettes - Democratic Underground
A central Kentucky city is mulling a proposal to take its smoking ban a step ... Kentncky is the ouly place I've been lately where
tobacco smoking is still ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/dubOlill1Qhp? ...
Smoking Early in Pregnancy Raises Risk of Heart Defects in Infants
HOPKINS COUNTY, KY - Maternal cigarette smoking in the first trimester was associated with a 20 to 70 percent greater
likelihood that a baby would be born ...
www.isurfhopkins"com/ .. .110001-smoking-early-in-pregnancy ...
Tip: Use quotes ("Iike this") around a set of words in your query to match them exactly. Learn more"
Remove this alert.
Manage your alerts.
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
News
Google Alerts [googlealerts-noreply@google.comj
Sunday, March 06, 2011 12:33 PM
Johnson, John D
Google Alert - kentucky smoking
Tobacco taxes help Illinois schools
Danville Commercial News
Tax rates for the rest of Illinois 'neighbors are: 60 cents in Kentucky, which ranks 40th; and $1.36 per pack io Iowa, which raoks 25th
highest in the nation. Toss in the federal cigarette tax of $1.01 per pack, and the charges really start to add up ....
.see an stories on this topic
Altria doesn expect to see tobacco production decline in Ky ...
In 2010, Philip Morris USA and U.S. Smokeless Tobacco bought more than 50 million pounds of tobacco from more than 2000
Kentucky growers ....
. ".
Kentucky City Mulls Ban On E-Cigarettes - Democratic Underground
A central Kentucky city is mulling a proposal to take its smoking ban a step ... Kentncky is the only place I've been lately where
tobacco smoking is still ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php? ..
Smoking Early in Pregnancy Raises Risk of Heart Defects in Infants
HOPKINS COUNTY, KY - Maternal cigarette smoking in the first trimester was associated with a 20 to 70 percent greater
likelihood that a baby would be born ...
www.isurlhopkins.com/ .. .! I 000 I-SlUO king-early-in-pregnancy ...
Tip: Use quotes ("like this") around a set of words in your query to match them exactly. Learn more.
Remove this alert.
Manage your alerts.
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Afternoon-
Marijanovic, Nina
Friday, March 04, 2011 3:17 PM
Hahn, Ellen J; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E; Robertson, Heather E
Afternoon Update
1. KCSP Team bios are complete. They are filed under KCSP/Spring Conference 2011/Jump Drive Master/ Bios/KCSP Team Bios
a. Speaker/panelist bios have been updated. Missing 5 bios, names are listed in the word document.
b. Speaker/Panelist bios are under KCSP/NMarijanovic/Spring Conference
2. "Tobacco and Going Green" I-pager is complete and has been uploaded to Sharepoint
a. I have scrapped the VFW I-pager and will begin anew. I will take that work with me while I travel. Airplane
layovers can be extremely boring. I will also take the I-pager that Dr. Hahn has passed my way.
3. Work on March newsletter as begun.
a. I have, at this time, scrapped CASAA from the Opposition Ust, because it's just more E-cig material; unless you all
want to keep the focus on that.
b. Written parts include: ghost write-up of Bullitt Co.,/J.essamine Co. vote outcome; 'Kick Butts Day'/ ANR Honors
AVIS.
c. Currently reviewing the articles to be included.
4. All registration for Spring Conference is up to date is KCSP /Spring Conference/Spring Conference 2011 folder
Hope you enjoy the weekend.
Best.
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
FYI...
Johnson, John D
Tuesday, March 01,201112:47 PM
Kercsmar, Sarah; Hahn, Ellen J
From: Google Alerts [mailto:googlealerts-noreply@google.coml
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 12:44 PM
To: Johnson, John D
News
Smoking and infant heart defects
Louisville Courier-Joumal (blog)
That's the conclusion of a new federal study that's particularly relevant in Kentucky, which ties with West Virginia for the nation's
highest adult smoking rate - 25.6 percent. A study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that ...
. .9n tllh tollk2
FDA spokesman acknowledges tobacco product classifcation [Paducah .. ,
Hi Guys, This seems to be the root of knowledgeable people, could anyone break down the legal sschmaschmoo into simple terms for
us newbies? Basically.
www.e-cigarette-forum.comJ .. .l1644 28-fda -spokesman-ackoo ...
Tip: Use a plus sign (+) to match a term in your query exactly as is. Learn more.
Remove this alert.
Manage your alerts.
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
. News
Google Alerts [googlealerts-noreply@google.com]
Tuesday, March 01,2011 12:44 PM
Johnson, John D
Google Alert - kentucky smoking
Smoking and infant heart detects
Louisville CourierJournal (blog)
That's the conclusion of a new federal study that's particularly relevant in Kentucky, which ties with West Virginia for the nation's
highest adult smoking rate - 25.6 percent. A study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that ..
See an stories on this topic }>
FDA spokesman acknowledges tobacco product classifcation [Paducah ...
Hi Guys, This seems to be the root of knowledgeable people, could anyone break down the legal sschmaschmoo into simple terms for
us newbies? Basically.
...
Tip: Use a plus sign (+) to match a term in your query exactly as is. Learn more.
Remove this alert.
Manage your alerts.
1
. Spagnuolo, Amy R
From: Riker, Carol A
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 9:57 AM
To:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Marijanovic, Nina; Johnson, John 0; Kercsmar, Sarah
RE: Jessamine Info requested
I wondered that, but don't spend any more time on it as apparently there's one already on Hahn group. I'm SO sorry.
Carol
From: Hahn, Ellen J
sent: Saturday, February 26,20111:15 PM
To: Marijanovic, Nina; Riker, Carol A; Johnson, John 0; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: Jessamine Info requested
Is 2005 the most recent data available? I would use the most recent data we can find.
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu

_-1 ....... 1 Find kysmokefree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OUf Goal is to Help YI)\) 'ybUfS
Sent: Thursday, February 24,20111:05 PM
To: Riker, carol A; Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: Jessamine Info requested
Afternoon-
Attached is a draft ofthe Jessamine County information. I left the US side blank under "Cerebrovascular" since I wasn't
sure if it was referring to stroke or not. To make it easier to double check the work, the 2005 population of Jessamine
1
Co. was 43, 463 and total deaths were 333. All other information came from the two embedded links underneath the
table. Is there any other information I should update on that page?
Best.
Nina
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:54 PM
To: Marijanovic, Nina
Cc: Hahn, Ellen Ji Johnson, John Di Kercsmar, Sarahi Mundy, Monica E
Subject: FW: Jessamine Info requested
Hi Nina,
I thought we had made up one of these Leading COD sheets for Jessamine, but if so, I can't find it. I looked up the data
(below) for the Nurse Practitioner who will speak at the Jessamine Co AQ Press Conference next week, but I'm
wondering if, when you have time, you could put the data into such a fact sheet for Jessamine Co and get someone to
double check it so we can put it out for the community. The links are in the Bourbon Co fact sheet, attached. (We only
include unintentional injuries because it's one of the leading COD; but we bold only the ones to which SHS contributes.)
If this is clear as mud, just let me know!
Thanks,
Carol
To: Schuller, Juawanna L
Cc: Hahn, Ellen Ji Johnson, John Di Kercsmar, Sarahi Mundy, Monica E
Subject: Jessamine Info requested
Hi Jonnie,
I'm attaching the e-cigarette one-pager for your own use w patients. The Summary of Studies tells about how bar
workers benefitted from SF whether smokers or not, but if you don't want to get into all that perhaps we can
incorporate it elsewhere. I don't want to detract at all from your great patient-focused presentation!
I don't have the type of fact sheet I was looking for on Jessamine, but I looked up the death rates for 2005 and the
leading causes of death are:
#1: Malignant Neoplasms: 82 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 220.3 (I<Y age adjusted rate: 214.5 for 2005)
#2: Diseases ofthe heart: 74 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 209.1 (Ky246.4)
#3: Unintentional injuries: 25 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 57.1 (KY; 53.7) (just included because it's the 3'd leading
COD)
#4: Cerebrovascular Diseases: 18 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 52.3 (KY: 49.8)
#5: Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases: 18 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 50.4 (KY 59.5)
All rates per 100,000
I really think your testimony about having to call the EMS for chest pain and resp problems is probably more powerful
than all these stats anyway!
I love your testimony; thanks so much I
Carol
2
Carol Riker, RN, MSN
Associate Professor
Provost's Distinguished Service Professor
Community Advisor, Rural Smoke-free Communities
Faculty Associate, Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy
555 College of Nursing
751 Rose Street
Cell: 859-619-3776
Office Phone: 859-323-6615
Fax: 859-323-1057
www.kcsp.uky.edu
rap
_,-r",1\lIi<y Find kysmokejree on and
3
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Afternoon-
Marijanovie, Nina
Thursday, February 24, 2011 1 :05 PM
Riker, Carol A; Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John 0; Keresmar, Sarah
Tobeont KCSP Jessamine Co Leading COD.doe
Attached is a draft of the Jessamine County information. I left the US side blank under "Cerebrovascular" since I wasn't
sure if it was referring to stroke or not. To make it easier to double check the work, the 2005 population of Jessamine
Co. was 43, 463 and total deaths were 333. All other information came from the two embedded links underneath the
table. Is there any other information I should update on that page?
Best.
Nina
Cc: Hahn, Ellen Ji Johnson, John Di Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Hi Nina,
(below) for the Nurse Practitioner who will speak at the Jessamine Co AQ Press Conference next week, but I'm
Thanks,
Carol
Cc: Hahn, Ellen Ji Johnson, John Di Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Hi Jonnie,
#1: Malignant Neoplasms: 82 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 22Q.3 (KY age adjusted rate: 214.5 for 2005)
#2: Diseases ofthe heart: 74 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 209.1 (Ky246.4)
1
COD)
I love your testimony; thanks so much!
Carol
Associate Professor
751 Rose Street
Cell: 859-619-3776
Fax: 859-323-1057
www.mc.ukv.edu/tobaccopolicy
www.kcsp.uky.edu
.,
_m.N<y Find kysmokefree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OU r Gool is to Help You iRealizL\ 'rbure
2
Leading Causes of Death in Jessamine County, Kentucky, 2005
Cause of Death Number of Rate per 100,000 Total Population
Deaths in Jessamine
Jessamine County'
County'
(% of all
deaths)
tMalignant Neoplasms (Cancer) 82 (24.6%) 220.3
tDiseases of the Heart 74 (22.2%) 209.1
Unintentional Injuries 25-<0.07%) 57.1
Cerebrovascular Diseases 18 (0.05%) 52.3
Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases 13 (0.04%) 50.4
t Leadmg causes of death known to be associated with secondhand smoke exposure.
a2005 Vital Statistics Reports from the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services
http://chfs.ky.gov/dph/vital/2005+Vital+Statistics+Reports.htm )
Kentucky" United
5tates
b
214.5 183.8
246.4 211.1
53.7 39.1
49.8
59.5 43.2
All age-adjusted death rates use the year 2000 standard. Age-adjusted rates based upon different standard
populations cannot be accurately compared.
bNational Center for Health Statistics State Profiles 2009 (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/PRESSROOM/data/Kentucky09.pdf),
age-adjusted rates.
How Secondhand Smoke is Connected with the Leading Causes of Death:
.:. Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their risks of
developing lung cancer by 20-30%.1
.:. Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their heart
disease risk by 25-30%.1
Public Health Solutions:
.:. After strong smoke-free laws go into effect, communities experience a 15% drop in heart
attacks during the first year, with continued decline reaching 36% in 3 years.2
.:. Smoke-free laws create healthy places for workers and patrons and reduce health care costs.
Smoke-free laws are a known public health solution.
1
1 U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco
Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006.
2Ughtwood JM, Stanton AG. Declines in acute myocardial infarction after smoke-free laws and individual risk
attributable to secondhand smoke. Circulation, 2009;120;1373-1379.
For more information, contact Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy UK College of Nursing, at 859-323-4587
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi again, Nina.
Riker, Carol A
Thursday, February 24, 2011 7:57 AM
Marijanovic, Nina
Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John 0; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Ellen asked me to give you a deadline for this. I'm not sure of your current workload. Would March 2
0d
or 3"d be too soon
for you to put the data into the format for Jessamine and get someone to double check our figures?
Just let me know!
Thanks,
Carol
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John 0; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Hi Nina,
(below) for the Nurse Practitioner who will speak at the Jessamine CO AQ Press Conference next week, but I'm
Thanks,
Carol
sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:47 PM
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John 0; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Hi Jonnie,
#1: Malignant Neoplasms: 82 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 220.3 (KY age adjusted rate: 214.5 for 2005)
#2: Diseases of the heart: 74 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 209.1 (Ky246.4)
1
#3: Unintentional injuries: 25 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 57.1 (KY; 53.7) (just includ("d because it's the 3'd leading
COD)
Carol
Associate Professor
751 Rose Street
Cell: 859-619-3776
Fax: 859-323-1057
www.kcsp.uky.edu
!!r--
: : ~
_"ftt<t\lII<y Find kysmoke/ree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OU r Gc>al is 10 Help You noal ilo Your"
2
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent:
To:
Thursday, February 24, 2011 6:32 AM
Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: FW: Jump Drive Materials
FYI
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
.-Ir1
= ~ M q Find kysmokejree on and U
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our Goal Is 10 Help You lRoallm \1)lIfS
sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 4:05 PM
To: Robertson, Heather E
Cc: Mundy, Monica E; Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: Jump Drive Materials
Should I contact the responsible parties of the other materials and set a due date to send them to me and/orfor them to place the materials in the
folders? As for the "AWARDS" section, the files that we have now are they to be placed in the folder, or, do! have to revise them to eliminate
Campbell County numbers, and then run them by Dr. Hahn, before inclusion?
Michelle - Could she put together a timeline (in one slide to show)? HeatherlO ask.Sarah,anything else to add to jump drive?
OPPOSITION:
I In slide show (Heather/Rachael)
quotes -1 pager - Monica/Hilarie lead (will meet 2/16); Amanda/Nina consult
1
SOCIAL NETINORKING
GUide to setting up FB (need to email Amanda)
PPT (AMANbll11asle'd)
SURGEON GENERAL'S REPORT:
_I
Ellen's slides (ppt)
PUBLIC SPEAKING:
Public presentation
TIP Sheet on Public Presentations
Their PPT
COALITIONS:
Community Toolbox Documents (CarOl will gather)
Additional materials - EIi,aoeth.
AQ:
Hilarie lead for update
move out and nonsmokers move In (Matt??? Caro!??)
! include Anatomy of smoke, 3rd hand smoke, calibration, 3EP, e-cigs - shows what smoker exhales including formaldehyde
finalized a list and sent.
AWARDS:
Ordinance listing and map, % covered
BRANDING:
Ppt
Tips for Branding
FAITH:
__ what she had ,PDF !ile.yvould you like me to contact her again and see if she does have a PPT?
researched reviewing portions to decide whatto include.
ORDINANCE VS. REGULATIONS
Ppt slides
Check TCLC ldhii
HEALTH DEPARTMENT PANEL:
NALBOH, ASTHO (Anything on advocacy in general? III Iii .III.,esearched organizations regarding SF advocacy and laws in general Elleri/q.rbl to
decide what to use)
STATE AND LOCAL
Resolution (sfky.org - Elizabeth to obtain)
1-pager: A Case for SF Laws - SF: Good for Health. Good for Business.
Local and State (sfky.org)
Quick Facts (new booklet still being developed) JOhrr!Ellen/Heather/Jdo
MISCELLANEOUS FILE
Youth talking points/Youth presentation (long and short - Under HOT Conferences)
New papers (Hilarie to work with Gai1 and ELLEN will send CV to help with list
College of Nursing
519 CON Building
lexington, KY 40536-0232
859.323.4599
nina.mariJanovic@uky.edu

Find kysmokefree on and 11
2
Spagnuolo,.Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi Nina,
Riker, Carol A
Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:54 PM
Marijanovie, Nina
Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Keresmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
FW: Jessamine Info requested
lobeont KCSP Bourbon Co Leading COD FINAL 051510.doe
(below) for the Nurse Practitioner who will speak at the Jessamine CO AQ Press Conference next week, but I'm
Thanks,
Carol
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Hi Jonnie,
#2: Diseases of the heart: 74 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 209.1 (Ky24604)
COD)
#5: Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases: 18 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 5004 (KY 59.5)
Carol
1
Associate Professor
751 Rose Street
Cell: 859-619-3776
Fax: 859-323-1057
www.kcsp.uky.edu
~
~ ~ Find kysmokefree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OUf 0("",1 is to Help You iR()aliz() \'burs
2
Leading Causes of Death in Bourbon County, Kentucky, 2005
Number of
Rate per 100,000 Total Population
Deaths in
Bourbon
County'
(% of all Bourbon
Cause of Death deaths) County'
tHeart Disease
56 (26.9%) 258.5
tAli Malignant Neoplasms (Cancer) 55 (26.4%) 250.5
tChronic Lower Respiratory
Disease 14 (6.7%) 65.0
tStroke
14 (6.7%) 66.9
Unintentional Injuries
13 (6.3%) 65.4
t Leading causes of death known to be associated with secondhand smoke exposure.
a2005 Vital Statistics Reports from the Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services
http://chfs.ky.gov/dph/vital/2005+Vital+Statistics+Reports.htm )
United
Kentuckyb States
b
258.5 211.1
219.9 183.8
61.3 43.2
52.8 46.6
57.3 39.1
All age-adjusted death rates use the yeer 2000 standard. Age-adjusted rates based upon different standard
populations cannot be accurately compared.
bNational Center for Health Statistics State Profiles 2009 (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/PRESSROOM/data/Kentucky09.pdf),
age-adjusted rates.
How Secondhand Smoke is Connected with the Leading Causes of Death:
+:+ Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their risks of
developing lung cancer by 20-30%.1
+:+ Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their heart
disease risk by 25-30%.1
Public Health Solutions:
+:+ After strong smoke-free laws go into effect, communities experience a 15% drop in heart
attacks during the first year, with continued decline reaching 36% in 3 years.2
+:+ Smoke-free laws create healthy places for workers and patrons and reduce health care costs.
Smoke-free laws are a known public health solution.1
'u.s. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco
Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006.
2Ughtwood JM, Stanton AG. Declines in acute myocardial infarction after smoke-free laws and individual risk
attributable to secondhand smoke. Circulation, 2009;120;1373-1379.
For more information, contact Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy UK Col/ege of Nursing, at 859-323-4587
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:47 PM
Schuller, Juawanna L
Cc:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Jessamine Info requested
Attachments: One_pager ecig_onepager REVISED FINAL 12231 O.pdf; Summary of Studies April 2009-
FINAL.pdf
Hi Jonnie,
#2: Diseases of the heart: 74 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 209.1 (Ky246.4)
#3: Unintentional injuries: 25 deaths for an age-adjusted rate of 57.1 (KY; 53.7) (just included because it's the 3,d leading
COD)
Carol
Associate Professor
555 College of NurSing
751 Rose Street
Cell: 859-619-3776
Fax: 859-323-1057
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on ond
1
E-cigarettes and Smoke-free Policies
What are E-cigarettes and what do they contain?
Battery operated devices with cartridges filled with nicotine, flavor, and other chemicals.'
The tip of the e-cigarette simulates the lit end of a cigarette, emitting a plume [ofvaporj.'
E-cigarettes tested by the FDA contain nicotine, diethylene glycol (used in antifreeze and toxic to humans),
carcinogens, and other impurities suspected to be harmful.'
Nicotine levels in e-cigarettes vary from very high to very low doses, regardless of labeling.'
Some e-cigarettes deliver drugs for weight loss and erectile dysfunction.'
E-cigarettes are not approved by the FDA as nicotine delivery devices. Yet, e-cigarette companies market them as
cessation aides and as a way around smoke-free policies.
Do E-cigarettes give off secondhand smoke?
After the user inhales, the residual aerosol, or vapor, is exhaled into the surrounding air.'
It is likely that e-cigarettes emit nicotine, propylene glycol, carcinogens, and other substances.'
Is secondhand vapor from e-cigarettes harmful?
E-cigarettes emit secondhand vapor (not smoke) that can be seen and smelled, but it has not been studied, so
claims of safety are premature.'
Nicotine deposits react with an element in the air to form potent carcinogens.'
People are then exposed to "thirdhand smoke" by inhalation, skin exposure, and ingestion.
Nicotine is deposited on indoor surfaces and lasts for weeks to months.'
Are there other concerns about the use of e-cigarettes?
They cause confusion when enforcing smoke-free policies.
They model "smoking" for youth.
The nicotine in e-cigarettes could facilitate youth initiation and addiction.
People using e-cigarettes as a cessation aide are not likely to be successful.
How are U.S. agencies responding to the risks associated with e-cigarettes?
On July 22, 2009, the FDA warned of the toxic ingredients in e-cigarettes.
In 2010, the FDA warned five manufacturers that they were illegally marketing e-cigarettes and told their trade
association that they intended to regulate these products.'
The Air Force and the Marine base at Quantico have banned the use of e-cigarettes in the workplace. New Jersey
and Suffolk County, NY, have banned e-cigarette use wherever smoking is prohibited.
All U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of e-cigarettes.
7
What are the recommendations regarding e-cigarettes and smoke-free policies?
American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, The Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, and the American Lung
Association recommend that smoke-free laws and policies prohibit the use of e-cigarettes.
8
1. United States Food and Drug Administration. FDA news release. FDA and public health experts warn about electronic cigarettes. 2009;
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnoucements/ucml73222.htm. Accessed 07/02/2009.
2. Yamin CK, Bitton A, Bates OW. E-cigarettes: A rapidly growing Internet phenomenon. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2010;153:607-609.
3. American Medical Association. Health agencies update Journal a/the American Medical Association. October 27, 2010;304(16):1777.
4. Trtchounian A, Williams M, Talbot P. Conventional and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have different smoking characteristics. Nicotine & Tobacco Research.
doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq114.
5. Hennlngfield JE, Zaatarl GS. Electronic nicotine delivery systems: Emerging science foundation for polley. Tobacco Control. April 1, 2010 2010i19(2):89-90. dol:
10,1136/tc,2009,035279,
6. Sieiman MA, Gundel, l.A., Pankow, H., Jacob, P. III, Singer, B.C., & Destaillats, H .. Formation of carcinogens Indoors by surface-mediated reactions of nicotine
with nitrous acid, leading to potentia! thirdhand smoke hazards. PNAS. 2010;107(15):6576-6581. doi/l0,1073/pnas.0912820107,
7. Action on Smoking and Health {ASH). E-clgarettes banned on domestic flights, reports ASH, 2010; http://www.prlog.org/l0942504-cigarettes-banned-on-
domestic-flights-reports-ash,html. Accessed 10/19/2010.
S, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, and American lung Association, Policy guidance document regarding e-
cigarettes April 9, 2010.
For more information, contact the Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy, 859-323-4587, www.kcsp.uky.edu
DK
UNlVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
_ 0 College of NUf5111g
Summary of Research on Smoke-free Laws in Kentucky
Smoke-free laws dramatically improve air quality. ,>
Indoor air pollution in restaurants, bars, and other entertainment venues dropped 91 % after Lexington's smoke-free
ordinance went into effect.
Lexington's air quality after the law took effect was 17 times better than Louisville's air quality before their partial
law took effect.
Smoke-free laws improve workers' health.'
Hair nicotine levels declined by 56% among smokers and nonsmokers working in restaurants and bars after
Lexington's smoke-free ordinance took effect.
Bar workers showed a larger decline in hair nicotine levels than restaurant workers.
Restaurant and bar workers were less likely to report breathing problems after the law took effect, whether or not
they smoked.
Smoke-free laws decrease emergency visits for asthma.'
There was a 22 % decline in emergency department visits for asthma in the 32 months after Lexington's smoke-
free law.
The decline was greater for adults than children (24 % vs. 18 %).
Smoke-free laws decrease smoking
The smoking rate in Fayette county declined nearly 32% (from 25.7% before the smoke-free law to 17.5% after),
while smoking rates remained stable in other similar Kentucky counties without smoke-free ordinances.
Lexington's law resulted in 16,500 fewer smokers for an estimated annual healthcare cost savings of $21 million.
The longer smoke-free laws are in effect, the more likely smokers are to reduce cigarette consumption and quit
smoking.
Smoke-free laws appeal to the public.'
There was a significant increase in public support for Lexington's smoke-free law, from 56.7% before the law
took effect to 64.0 % six months afterwards.
Since the smoke-free law took effect, there was a siguificant jump in perceived importance of smoke-free
environments and concern about the hannful effects of exposure to secondhaud smoke.
Smoke-free laws do not hurt business."IO
Restaurant employment increased by about 3 % and bar employment remained stable in the 14 months after
Lexington's smoke-free ordinance went into effect.
Bingo revenues have not declined after implementation of local smoke-free laws in Kentucky,
!Lee, K., Hahn, EJ" OkaIi, C.T .C., Repace, J., & Troutman, A. Differential impact of smoke-free laws on indoor air quality. Jourl/al of Environmental Health,
2008,70(8),2430.
2Lee. K., Hahn, EJ" Robertson, HE., Lee, S., Vogel, S.L., & Travers, MJ. Strength of smoke-free laws and indoor air quality. Nicotine & Tobacco Research,
2009; doi: 1O.1093/ntr/ntp026.
3Hahn E, Rayens M, York N, Okoli C, Zhang M, & AI-Delaimy W. Effects of a smoke-free law on hair nicotine and respiratory symptoms in restaurant and
bar workers. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2006; 48(9):906-913.
4Rayens, M.K., Burkhart, P.V., Zhang, M., Lee, S., Moser, D.K., Mannino, D., & Hahn, EJ. Reduction in asthma-related emergency department visits after
implementation of a smoke-free law. Journal of Allergy and Clillicallmmunology, 2008;doi lO.lOI6/j.jaci.2008.06.029. '
sHahn, E.I., Rayens, M.K., Butler, K.M., Zhang, M., Durbin, E;, & Steinke, D. Smoke-free laws and adult smoking prevalence. Preventive Medicine, 2008;
47,206209.
6Hahn, EJ., Rayens, M.K . Langley, R.E., Darville, A., & Dignan, M. Time since smoke-free law and smoking cessation behaviors. Nicotille & Tobacco
Research, ill press.
1Hahn, EJ . Rayens, M.K., Ridner, S.L., Butler, K.M . Zhang, M., & Staten, R.R. Smoke-free laws and smoking and drinking among college students,pending
review.
8Rayens, M.K., Hahn, El . Langley, R.E.. Hedgecock. S . Butler, K.M . & Maggio, L. Public opinion and smoke-free laws. Policy, Politics, & Nursing
Practice, 2007:8(4): 262-270.
9Pyles M, Mullineaux D, Okoli C, & Hahn E. Economic impact of a smoke-free law in a tobacco-growing community. Tobacco Control, 2007; 16(1):66-68.
lGpyles, M.K. & Hahn, E.I. Smoke-free legislation and charitable gaming in Kentucky. Tobacco Control, 2009; 18:60-62.
April 2009; University of Kentucky Tobacco Policy Research Program, www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicy
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:59 AM
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Amy Barkley; Betsy Janes; Brandi Gilley; Bronson Frick; Cathy Callaway;
Dyshel Thompson; Eric Evans; Irene Centers; James Sharp; Jennifer Redmond; Wagner,
Kristian K; Mark Sizemore; Kercsmar, Sarah; Scott Lockard; Tonya Chang
Subject: RE: Two House Floor Amendments filed yesterday?
So Rep. Gooch represents Daviess and Hopkins-both with weak laws. There is talk of strengthening in Daviess, but we
are suspect because one magistrate is interested only in adding e-cigarettes.
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/legislator/H012.htm
Professor and Director, Tobacco policy Research Program
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
COLLEGE OF NURSING
01.1 r GO\al is 10 HtlJp You i R l ~ a l ilo 'fburs
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 5:54 AM
To: Amy Barkley; Betsy Janes; Brandi Gilley; Bronson Frick; Cathy Callaway; Dyshel Thompson; Hahn, Ellen J; Eric Evans;
Irene Centers; James Sharp; Jennifer Redmond; Wagner, Kristian K; Mark Sizemore; Kercsmar, Sarah; Scott Lockard;
Tonya Chang
Subject: Two House Floor Amendments filed yesterday?
Good morning,
So yesterday two House floor amendments were filed by Rep. Gooch (I didn't think they could file amendments on the
House floor until the bill came out of committee?). One exempts cigar bars, and the other exempts retail tobacco stores,
includes an age provision, and deletes places of employment. Were we expecting this?
Ellen
1
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
ejhahnOO@email.ukY.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
lffsp
~ . - m . " " " Find kysmokefree on and
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Ou I Goal Is 10 HllJp You Rcal iL() 'rours
2
Spagnuolo. Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent:
To:
Thursday, December 02,20104:14 PM
Johnson, John D
Subject: RE: KCSP November Community Partner Newsletter
I forwarded to Amanda and Kristian. Floyd Co. is Amanda's county (and Kristian is her buddy). Would it help if we
reviewed the staff assignments again?
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmoi<efree on Twitter and Facebook I
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OU r 1& it;. You 'I'buill;
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 10:42 AM
To: Hall, Kimberly (LHD - Floyd Co)
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: KCSP November Community Partner Newsletter
. Hi Kimberly,
I've added you to the list - welcome! Please let us know if you have any questions.
John
From: Hall, Kimberly (LHD - Floyd Co) [mailto:kimberly.hall@ky.gov]
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: FW: KCSP November Community Partner Newsletter
John,
I am doing some ofthe tobacco prevention at Floyd County Health Department.
Can you please add me to your email distribution Iist .... Thanks so much ....
1
Kimberly Hall
From: Snider, Lyle (LHD-Floyd Co)
To: Hall, Kimberly (LHD - Floyd Co)
Subject: FW: KCSP November Community Partner Newsletter
Dear Kim,
I suggest replying to this e-mail introducing yourself to John and the UK Kentucky Center for Smoke Free Policy. Lyle
From: Johnson, John D [mailto:jdjohnson@uky.edu]
Sent: Thursday, December 02,2010 10:10 AM
To: (advocacyaction@bellsouth.net); (LoriL.Nelson@ky.gov); (mary.huff@cancer.org);(ronne.nunley@pathways-ky.org);
(scorriveau@communicare.org); Napier, Allison L (LHD - Three Rivers Dist); Amy Weber; Brumley-Shelton, Angela (LHD -
Lexington-Fayette Co.); april.crosby@tema.toyota.com; Arrowood, Karen; Begley, Kathy; Ben Wiederholt; Betsy Burns
Janes; Bobbi Harned; Butler, Karen M; Riker, Carol A; Kercsmar, Sarah; Sawyers, Charlotte P (LHD-Laurel Co); Cheryl
Armes (cheryll.armes@ky.gov); actionoffice@bellsouth.net; Donna Bernier; Thompson, Dyshel D (LHD-Monroe Co);
Hahn, Ellen J; Ellen Schroeder; Emily Prabell; Eversole, Sandy; Heise, Georgia F (LHD-Three Rivers Dist); Hamilton,
Geraldine B (LHD-Knox Co); Gloria Sams; Bowen, Glynda; James Sharp; Jennifer Redmond; Cobb, Jessica E (LHD-
Lexington-Fayette Co.); Dumaurier, Jessica R (LHD-Lexington-Fayette Co); Joan Buchar; John Bonaguro; Judy Richardson
Jett ; Karen Gabbert; Kathy Combs; Katie Bathje; Kaufman, Erin; Dawes, Kelly R (LHD-Pennyrile Dist); Flora, Kim D
(LHD-Warren County Health Dept.); KR Green; Kristy.Young@cancer.org; Martin, Larry D (LHD - Powell Co); Lee Carter
(Edward.Carter@va.gov); Lisa Greathouse; Luke Barlowe; Snider, Lyle (LHD-Floyd Co); Hensley, Mark A (LHD-Laurel
Co); Mason, Jennifer L; Rowe, Melinda G (LHD-Lexington-Fayette Co); Alford, Michelle; Michelle Eversole;
mikek@kylung.org; Milly Diehl (mhdiehl@insightbb.com); Nafus, Kathy--Erlanger; Natalie True (NatalieT.True@ky.gov);
Dales, Octavia J (LHD-Pike Co); Pat Whelan; Paul, Erin E; Alexander, Paula (LHD - Franklin Co); Peggy Kinsella; Penny
High; Briney, Rachel S (LHD-Lincoln Trail Dist); Cima, Rachel; Rick DuBose (Rick.DuBose@wku.edu); Vanderhoof, Rinda A
(LHD-Laurel Co); Miracle, Rita S (LHD-Knox Co.); Robertson, Heather E; Mattingly, Rodney R (LHD-Lincoln Trail Dist);
Ruth Davis; Saundra Newton: (ACS) ; Hale, Sherrie (LHD-Powell Co); Sherry Payne (sherry.payne@cancer.org); Harris,
Stacy M; Steer, Emily (LHD-Mercer Co); Stephanie Vogel; Susan Brown; Susan Clarkson; Suzanne Gude
(s.gude@louisville.edu); Tiffany S. Bowman; Tonda Luckett (tluckett@bardstowncable.net); Brewer, Vanessa C (LHD -
Franklin Co); Vestal, Brenda L; Wagner, Kristian K; Mundy, Monica E; wellness.tmmk@hfitcenter.com
Subject: KCSP November Community Partner Newsletter

KENTUCKY CENTER FOR SMOKE-FREE POLICY
Community Partner Newsletter
November 2010
Smfike-iree C(Jmmunities: Good/or People, Gooel/or Business
Welcome to the Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy (KCSP) Community Partners' Newsletter!
This Newsletter contains:
2

1. Smoke-free Policy Updates
University of Kentucky's Tobacco-free Campus Anniversary
News from the American Public Health Association Annual Meeting,
Denver, CO
Adult education as a vehicle for health communication
Norm spreading or behavioral compensating- Do clean indoor air laws increase
voluntary home smoke-free rules?
Critical appraisal training to expand health literacy and reduce health
disparities
Messages that motivate rural communities to support smoke-free policy
change
Justice is what love looks like: Quote from Cornel West
2. Smoke-free Research Update
State-specific Prevalence of Cigarette Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use Among Adults-
2009
3. Opposition Watch
The Growing Popularity of E-cigarettes
Northern Kentucky Tea Party
Please scroll down for more information on each topicl
Smoke-free Policy Updates
1. University of Kentucky's Tobacco-free Anniversary
November marked the first anniversary of the University of Kentucky'S tobacco-free campus policy. This
was celebrated the week of November 15 with activities including distribution of policy reminder cards
(with free drink coupon), display tables around campus with cold turkey sandwiches, s-mores ("cold turkey
is not the way to go-ask for s'more information about how to quit"), and hot chocolate, and a campus-
wide cigarette butt clean-up.
Check out Kysmokefree on Facebook for tobacco-free anniversary pictures
http:((www.facebook.com!album.php?aid=25739&id=121589417877279
2. News from the American Public Health Association meeting in Denver, Colorado
Several members of the KCSP team attended the 2010 American Public Health Association conference in
November. Below are selected highlights from some of the sessions we enjoyed the most!
Ariela M. Freedman, MPH, MAT - Rollins School of Public Healthy, Emory University, Atlanta, GA
3
According to the Institute on Medicine, "nearly half of all Americans - 90 million people - have difficulty
understanding and acting upon health information." So much of what we do in tobacco control is based on
print media and we may be missing a large audience who possess low literacy and low health literacy skills.
During Ms. Freedman's session at APHA, she suggested reaching out to adult education to reach those who
are often disproportionately affected by smoking and/or secondhand smoke. Adult educators are experienced
in translating information to meet the literacy skills oftheir participants. Adult education is also a known and
safe location where participants often have eXisting relationships and participants frequently report learning
from each other.
Questions to consider:
Are you aware of the adult education programs in your county?
Have you ever talked with the adult education program about your smoke-free activities?
Have you reviewed the materials you use in your tobacco control program to make sure they are
readable for low literacy audiences?
For more information on clearly communicating health information, visit:
hUp:ljwww.health.gov/communication/literacy/plainlanguage/PlainLanguage.htm
For a "how to" on writing easy-to-read health information: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/etr.html
Norm spreading or behavioral compensating- Do clean indoor air laws increase voluntary home smoke-free
rules?
Dr. Kai-Wen Cheng, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San
Francisco
This session examined whether smoke-free laws increase the adoption of voluntary home smoke-free rules
among smoking households. The study found that smoke-free laws increase the likelihood that family
households voluntarily implement smoke-free home rules. For more information on smoke-free homes and
multi unit housing, please visit Americans for Non-smokers Rights at http://www.no-
smoke.org/goingsmokefree.php ?id=101
Critical appraisal training to expand health literacy and reduce health disparities
Donna Odierna, DrPH, University of California, San Francisco
The goal of this project was to implement and evaluate health literacy workshops for consumer advocates,
journalists, and healthcare providers. The ability to evaluate evidence for credibility and quality, and to
analyze risks and benefits is important for healthcare decision-making. It is also crucial for effective
communication with others, including policy makers. As a result of taking part in the workshops, participants'
confidence in critical appraisal skills increased by about 30%. Attendees reported that they were more likely to
use critical appraisal skills to identify valid sources of information, recognize financial conflicts of interest,
effectively communicate health information, and critique tobacco advertising.
Additional information on health literacy training may be found at:
http:/(www.hsph.harvard.edu/healthliteracY/practice/training/index.html
4
Messages that motivate rural communities to support smoke-free policy change
Anna Kostygina, PhD, Postdoctoral Scholar, University of Kentucky
Focus groups were conducted with 82 residents of three rural communities to study the perceived
effectiveness of print advertisements used in rural communities to promote smoke-free policies in regard to
message framing and emotional tone. Based on the results, tips are included below for successful media
campaigns in rural communities:
Use bright colors, such as red or yellow.
Include a clear phone number or website where people can take action.
Be concise with the wording.
Messages with a serious tone tend to be more effective than lighthearted messages (such as jokes or
cartoons).
Messages stressing the risks of secondhand smoke exposure were more effective than those focusing
on the benefits of smoke-free air.
Messages that appear to blame smokers (i.e.: "Smokers kill non-smokers") were offensive to some
participants.
Messages appealing to social norms and religious beliefs received strong support from the participants.
Visit American's for Nonsmokers' Rights for examples of smoke-free ads used in other communities:
http://www.no-smoke.org/goingsmokefree.php?id=115.
Justice is what love looks like, Cornel West, PhD, Professor, Princeton University
Quote:
... "allow suffering to speak .... have the courage to question things that obstruct justice .... unregulated markets
don't work to provide justice for aiL"
Is it fair or just that some people have to breathe smoky air at work?
Would workers exposed to secondhand smoke at work in your community be willing to get involved in
your smoke-free efforts? Could you use their quotes (anonymous) in a 'worker quote' document?
How can you frame smoke-free as a justice issue in your community?
See Robert Wood Johnson's summary of the APHA meeting: http:((rwjfapha.com/
Smoke-free Research Updates
"State-Specific Prevalence of Cigarette Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use Among Adults --- United States,
2009." Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, November 5, 2010 /59(43); 1400-1406
Cigarette smoking and smokeless tobacco use cause or increase the risk for lung, throat, oral, and other types
of cancers. In the article, the CDC analyzed data from the 2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
(BRFSS). Smoking prevalence was highest in Kentucky & West Virginia (25.6%). The prevalence of smokeless
tobacco use was higher among men than women in all states and territories. These data suggest that
smokeless tobacco use is predominantly a public health problem among men, young adults, and persons with
lower education, and in certain states:
5
Smokeless tobacco use among men was significantly higher than among women in all 50 states
Among the 50 states and DC, smokeless tobacco use was most common among persons aged 18--24
years
Smokeless tobacco use tended to decrease with increasing education
Percent of smokeless tobacco use among adults in Kentucky: 6.7%
Percent of cigarette smokers who also use smokeless tobacco in Kentucky: 7.7%
As smoke-free laws become more widespread and the tobacco industry continues to market their products for
'dual use,' the percent of cigarette smokers who also use smokeless is expected to rise.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5943a2.htm?s cid=mm5943a2 w
opposition Watch
Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, have continued to become more popular and widely
accepted as evidenced by the article in the link below. The e-cigarette industry has launched an organized
campaign to convince the public that e-cigarettes help smokers quit. There is no research evidence that this is
the case. In fact, there is evidence that e-cigarettes actually help smokers remain addicted to nicotine. The
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent letters to five tobacco companies in September indicating that
they were marketing their products illegally as unapproved drugs and that the products would need to be
regulated by the FDA.
http://new-smoke.com/e-cigarette-news/david-Ietterman-smokes-the-electronic-cigarette/
http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2010/default.htm ?fragment25 NextRow=51
See the attached fact sheet on E-cigarettes and Smoke-free Policies. Several local smoke-free
ordinances/regulations in Kentucky prohibit the use of e-cigarettes (Bardstown, Glasgow, Madison County
BOH regulation, amended 12/1/10).
The Northern Kentucky Tea Party is doing the bidding ofthe tobacco industry and other anti-health groups
(i.e., Bluegrass Institute, Kentucky Libertarian Party, NKY Choice) to vigorously oppose the proposed smoke-
free ordinances in Campbell and Kenton Counties. Check their website: http://www.nkyteapartv.org/ and read
'Smoking Ban Supporters Hypocritical: The Lexington Herald-Leader called out the Tea Party and urged
Campbell and Kenton Fiscal Courts to make the healthy decision in an opinion editorial this week.
http://www.kentucky.com/2010/11/30/1545933/go-smoke-free-northern-ky.html
Feedback
If you have any comments or suggestions regarding the KCSP Community Partners' Newsletter, or would like
to suggest future content for the newsletter, please let us know! We would love to hear your feedback
kcspOO@lsv.uky.edu or contact John Johnson jdjohnson@uky.edu, 859-323-4587.
Voluntarv Participation
6
The KCSP Community Partners' distribution list is intended to provide pertinent information to local tobacco
control community advocates in Kentucky. If you have received this newsletter in error or wish to be removed
from the list, please reply to this email with REMOVE in the subject headline.
John D. Johnson, MA
Community Liaison
University of Kentucky College of Nursing
751 Rose Street, College of Nursing 509
Lexington, Kentucky 40536-0232
859-323-4587
859-323-1057 (FAX)
jdjohnson@uky.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
7
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Thursday, December 02, 2010 11 :58 AM
Fallin, Amanda T; Wagner, Kristian K
Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D
Subject: govt building SF policy
Attachments: tobcont KCSP Grant Co Bldgs No Smoking Ordinance. doc; tobcont KCSP Courthouse
Policies in KY 3-04.xls
Not sure this spreadsheet is helpful except as a place to start, but here's an 04 list of courthouse policiesll Omigosh, I
also found an 02 Grant Co policy\! Definitely would need updati.ng to account for e-cigarettes, etc. (opposition
apparently present in Madison Co last nite re covering e-cigs in sf reg).
Kristian, do you know if Monroe has an updated policy? I've written to Lee Ann Taylor in Lincoln county.
Thanks for your work, everyone!
Carol
Associate Professor
751 Rose Street
Phone: 859-323-6615
Fax: 859-323-1057
Cell: 859-619-3776
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter and facebook
Smoke-free Communities:
Good for People, Good for Business
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our GO{\! is tf) Ht;)p 'You "l'l)Uf1::;
1
AN OIU)INANC REG.ULATING. SMOKING. IN
FACILITIES CONTROLI.f:D BYTHR FISCAL COURT
WITHIN aUNT COUNTY, KENTUCKY
WHEREAS, the Fiscal Court of Grant County deems it necessary to enact
this Ordinance to protect and preserve the health, safety, welfare and
convenience of the inhabitants of Grant County pursuant to the Fiscal
Court's authority under KRS 67.083 and being cognizant ofKRS 61.165
(2);
WHEREAS, Numerous studies have found that tobacco is a major
contributor to indoor air pollution; and
WHEREAS, reliable studies have shown that breathing secondhand smoke
is a significant health hazard for several population groups, including
elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals
with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with
obstructive airway disease; and
WHEREAS, health hazards induced by breathing second-hand smoke
include lung cancer, respiratory infection, decreased exercise tolerance,
decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction, and bronchospasm;
and
WHERUS, nonsmokers who suffer allergies, respiratory disease and other
ill-effects of breathing secondhand smoke may experience a loss of job
productivity or may be forced to take periodic sick leave because of such
adverse reactions; and
WHEREAS, numerous studies have shown that a majority of both
nonsmokers and smokers desire to have restrictions on smoking in
public places and places of employment; and
WHRUS, smoking is a potential cause of fires, and cigarette and cigar
burns and ash stains on furniture and fixtures cause loss to publicly
owned facilities; and
WHEREAS, the purposes of this ordinance are: (1) to protect the public
health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in enclosed public places open
to the general public and by regulating smoking in places of employment;
and (2) to strike a reasonable balance between the needs of persons who
smoke an the need of non-smokers to breathe smoke-free air, and to
recognize that, where needs conflict, the need to breath smoke-free air
shall have priority;
NOW'. THEREfORE. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED BY THE. fISCAL. COURT Of
liRANT COUNTY. THAT:
SECTION ONE
Findings. The Fiscal Court hereby finds that the facts stated in the
preamble to this Ordinance are true.
SECTION TWO
Purpose. Because smoking of tobacco or any other weed or plant
is a positive danger to health and a cause of material discomfort and a
health hazard to those who are present in confined places, and in order
to serve public health, safety and welfare, the declared purpose of this
Ordinance is to protect public health and safety by prohibiting the
smoking of tobacco or any other weed or plant in certain areas which are
used by or open to the public.
SECTION THREE
Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following terms
shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates
that a different meaning is intended:
"County" means the County of Grant.
"Employee" means any individual who receives remuneration for
services performed in the service of the County.
"Employer" means any person, partnership or corponltion who
employs the services of an individual person or persons.
"Smoke" or "Smoking" includes the carrying of a pipe, cigar or
cigarette of any kind, which is burning, or the igniting of a pipe, cigar or
cigarette of any kind, which is burning.
"Service line" means an indoor line or area where persons await
service of any kind. Such service shall include, but is not limited to,
giving of information, directions or advice, and transfers or renewals
whether or not anything of monetary value is involved.
"Workplace" means any interior space under the control of the
Grant County Fiscal Court where employees or the public normally
frequent during the course of a workday, including, but not limited to,
work areas, employee lounges, conference rooms and employee eating
areas.
SECTION FOUR
Prohibition In Certain Public Places. Smoking shall be prohibited
in the following places:
A. All buildings or other enclosed areas occupied by County
officials, employees or staff, whether same be owned or leased by the
County, except in areas, which the County Judge/Executive may
designate as smoking areas. An area may be designated as a smoking
area only if the area involved:
1. Is not regularly open to the public; and
2. Does not require major room or building modifications such as
the installation of smoke removal equipment; and
3. Is not regularly occupied by nonsmokers.
4.
In any dispute arising under the smoking area designations made
by the County Judge/Executive under this Ordinance, the rights of the
nonsmoker shall be given precedence and appeal may be taken to the
Grant Fiscal Court, whose decision as to the designation shall be final.
B. All restrooms accessible to the public or to nonsmoking
employees.
C. All lobbies, meeting rooms and hallways and other areas open
to the public.
SECTION FIVE
Posting of Signs. Signs which designate smoking or no smoking
areas established by this Ordinance shall be conspicuously posted at
various locations throughout the affected facilities in such a manner as
is calculated to actually inform persons utilizing said facility or facilities
of the status of the area then being utilized by said persons.
SECTION SIX
Compliance and Responsibility.
A. The members of the Fiscal Court and the head of each County
Department shall be responsible for compliance with this Ordinance as
to all facilities under the control of the affected individual.
B. The Grant County Sheriff shall also be responsible for
enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance in all areas where same is
in effect within the confines of the County of Grant and may proceed to
either warn or cite for a violation of same in the discretion of said officer.
SECTION SEVEN
Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances
shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions
of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision
or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are
declared to be severable.
SECTION EIGHT
Penalty. In addition to any other penalty provided, any person
convicted of violating any provision of this Ordinance shall be fined not
less than $5.00 nor more than $50.00 for each offense, and a separate
offense shall be deemed committed on each day during or on which a
violation occurs or continues. In addition to the monetary penalty
imposed herein, employees shall also be dealt with in a manner
consistent with applicable personnel policies.
Introduced, seconded and given first reading on ~ day of December,
2002.
Adopted by the Fiscal Court of Grant County after second reading at a
Regular meeting on the __ day of , 2002, and on the
same occasion signed in open session by the County Judge/Executive as
evidence of his approval of same, attested under seal by the Grant
County Fiscal Court Clerk and declared to be in full force and effect
immediately after being published pursuant to law.
ATTEST:
Clerk
Grant County Fiscal Court
By:-c-------:----,---_-,---
Grant County Judge/Executive
COURTHOUSE SMOKING POLICIES IN KENTUCKY
KEY:
NS = No Smoking anywhere
SWR = Smoking allowed With Restrictions
NR = No Restrictions on smoking ( allowed anywhere)
courthouse - employees and visitors can no
restrooms or oourtroom I New justice center (under oonstruction) - No

Smoking is restricted to the front lobby
ic.
38 Whitley County
39 Wolfe Count
COURTHOUSE SMOKING POLICIES IN KENTUCKY
Whitley County Courthouse has No Smoking signs but the Judge executive
Spagnuolo. Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Thursday, December 02,20107:50 AM
Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Marijanovic, Nina
Subject: RE: newsletter
Attachments: One-pager e-cigarettes and Secondhand Smoke EH 112110.pdf; One pager Green Circle
111610.pdf; KCSP November 2010 Newsletter 120310 NEAR FINAL.doc
Importance: High
John,
I made the changes/additions. It is ready to go once you make the final additions/tweaks (see comments). Let's attach
the files attached to this email. I think we needed to provide some correct information along with the link you provide
on e-cigarettes. Also, I want to attach the Green Circle one-pager to go along with the Opposition Watch.
Let me know if you have questions. Please be sure to use THIS version (#$1) ofthe newsletterto make the final tweaks.
Let's send this out today please. Have fun at your conference tomorrow, John!!
Ellen
p.s. Yes, let's sit down and talk about holiday hours, etc.
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.ukv.edu
Find I<ysmokefree on Twitter and Facebook !
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our Goal ls tn HI{l'lp YCi.\ YDurs
Frorn:Johnson,John D
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 20107:07 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen Ji Kercsmar, Sarah
Cc: Marijanovic, Nina
I attached the wrong file yesterday - here is the most up to date version with some review comments you can look at.
Sorry again for the confusion. Sharepoint will definitely help this process.
1
One thing to note is that there is nothing under the KY Tea party entry which I have highlighted in yellow. I should be
able to wrap this up tomorrow with Ellen's feedback.
Also, I am scheduled to go to a sustainability in marketing all day colloquium on Friday and I wanted to clear that with
YOLi (Ellen and Sarah). I can stay longer tomorrow to wrap up anything I need to get done for this week, obviously the
newsletter and the next round of calls to the statewide people.
Perhaps on Monday we could have a brief, general conversation on the Christmas/new year holiday coming LIP and how
that will impact our schedules. The good news is afterthis week I'm finished with classes and can get on some sort of a
regular schedule here!
Thanks for your patience,
John
From: Hahn, Ellen J
sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 10:53 AM
To: Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Importance: High
This is still not the right version. I am reattaching my initial comments. Please integrate and resend. Thanks.
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmoke!ree on Twitter and Facebook !
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OW f GC<i;)! it;; 1\..1 tT\(i{,1Ef:tl
From: Johnson,John D
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:12 AM
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: newsletter
Hi All,
2
Sorry I completely ignored the significant work Ellen put into the newsletter on the last draft. I think I've integrated all
the changes I've received so far into this document and addressed everything I've been able to at this point. I'm waiting
for a couple of pieces of information and revisions.
Thanks for your work,
John
John D. Johnson, MA
Community Liaison
859-323-4587
859-323-1057 (FAX)
jdjohnson@uky.edu
www.kcsp.ukv.edu
3
What are E-cigarettes and what do they contain?
Battery operated devices with cartridges filled with nicotine, flavor, and other chemicals. (USFDA, 2009)
The tip of the e-cigarette simulates the lit end of a cigarette, emitting a plume [of vapor]. (Yamin, Bitton, &
Bates, 2010)
E-cigarettes tested by the FDA contain nicotine, diethylene glycol (used in antifreeze and toxic to humans),
carcinogens, and other impurities suspected to be harmful (USFDA 2009).
Nicotine levels in e-cigarettes vary from very high to very low doses, regardless of labeling. (USFDA, 2009)
Some e-cigarettes deliver drugs for weight loss and erectile dysfunction (AMA, 2010).
E-cigarettes are not approved by the FDA as nicotine delivery devices. Yet, e-cigarette companies market them
as cessation aides and as a way around smoke-free policies.
Do E-cigarettes give off secondhand smoke?
After the user inhales, the residual aerosol, or vapor, is exhaled into the surrounding air. (Trtchounlan, Williams,
& Talbot, 2010)
It is likely that e-cigarettes emit nicotine, propylene glycol, carcinogens, and other substances (Henningfield &
Zaatari, 2010).
Is secondhand vapor from e-cigarettes harmful?
E-cigarettes emit secondhand vapor (not smoke) that can be seen and smelled, but it has not been studied, so
claims of safety are premature (Henningfield & Zaatari, 2010).
Nicotine deposits react with an element in the air to form potent carcinogens (Sleiman et al. 2010).
People are then exposed to "thirdhand smoke" by Inhalation, skin exposure, and ingestion.
Nicotine deposits on indoor surfaces and lasts for weeks to months (Sleiman et al. 2010).
Are there other concerns about the use of e-cigarettes?
They cause confusion when enforcing smoke-free policies.
They model "smoking" for youth.
The nicotine in e-cigarettes could facilitate youth initiation and addiction.
People using e-cigarettes as a cessation aide are not likely to be successful.
How are U.S. agencies responding to the risks involved with e-cigarettes?
On July 22, 2009, the FDA warned of the toxic ingredients in e-cigarettes.
In 2010, the FDA warned five manufacturers that they are illegally marketing e-cigarettes and told their trade
association that they intend to regulate these products (AMA, 2010).
The Air Force and the Marine base at Quantico have banned the use of e-cigarettes in the workplace. New
Jersey and Suffolk county, NY, have banned use wherever smoking is prohibited (ASH, 2010).
All U.S. domestic airlines ban the use of e-cigarettes (ASH, 2010).
What are the recommendations regarding e-cigarettes and smoke-free policies?
American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, The Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, and the American
Lung Association recommend that smoke-free laws and policies prohibit the use of e-cigarettes. (ACS, AHA,
CTFK, & ALA, 2010).
For more information, contact the Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy, 859-323-4587, www.kcsp.ukv.edu
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH). (2010). E-cigarettes banned on domestic flights, reports ASH. Accessed 10/19/2010
at http://www.prlog.org/10942504-cigarettes-banned-on-domestic-flights-reports-ash.htm I
American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, The Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, and the American Lung
Association. (April 9, 2010). Policy guidance document regarding e-cigarettes.
American Medical Association. (October 27, 2010). Health agencies update. journal of the American Medical Association,
304 (16), 1777.
Henningfield, J.E., & Zaatari, G.s. (2010). Electronic nicotine delivery systems: Emerging science foundation for policy.
Tobacco Control, 19(2), 89-90.
International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans:
Tobacco Smo/(e and Involuntary Smoking. Vol. 83. Lyon (France): International Agency for Research on Cancer,
2002.
Sieiman, M.A., Gundel, L.A., Pankow, J.F., Jacob, P. III, Singer, B.C., & Destaillats, H. (2010) Formation of carcinogens
indoors by surface-mediated reactions of nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential thlrdhand smoke
hazards. PNAS, 107((15),6576-6581.
Trtchounian, A., Williams, M., & Talbot, P. (July 19,2010) Conventional and electronic Cigarettes (e-ciagrettes) have
different smoking characteristics. Nicotine & Tobacco Research Advance Access. Doi:10.1093!ntr!ntql14
u.s. Food and Drug Administration. (7/2//09). FDA news release. FDA and public health experts warn about electronic
Cigarettes. Accessed 10/19/10 at
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnoucements/ucm173222.htm
Yamin, c.K., Bitton, A., & Bates, D.W. (2010). E-cigarettes: A rapidly growing internet phenomenon. Annals of Internal
Medicine, 153, 607-609.
For more information, contact the Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy, 859-323-4587, www.kcsp.uky.edu
Why the 'Green Circle' Approach is Wrong for Northern Kentucky
When a smoke-free ordinance is proposed, anti-health groups often suggest "compromises" such as the
Green Circle signs. These recommendations come from the tobacco industry playbook and they do not
protect public health.
The 'Green Circle' approach does not change the status guo
Posting signs is no different than the current situation in Northern Kentucky.
Workers and the public remain exposed to dangerous toxins in secondhand smoke. The 'Green
Circle' approach would put our loved ones at serious risk!
"Compromise" policies give the illusion that something is being done to protect nonsmokers
from secondhand smoke when, in reality, workers remain unprotected.'
The 'Green Circle' does not protect workers
The U.S. Surgeon General has declared that the only way to protect the workforce from
secondhand smoke is to completely eliminate it indoors.' Posting signs does not reduce the
toxic chemicals in the air.
All workers and patrons deserve to breathe safe, smoke-free air.
The 'Green Circle' is an accommodation strategy promoted by the tobacco industry
Posting signs such as the Green Circle approach is consistent with the tobacco industry
argument that smoking is an "adult choice."
Phillip Morris, the National Smokers Alliance, and other anti-health groups with tobacco industry
ties have been linked with past attempts to derail effective smoke-free laws by suggesting
compromise like the 'Green Circle." .
The bottom line is that the goal of smoke-free laws is to protect the health of all workers. Posting signs
to notify patrons if establishments allow smoking or not does not protect those who work in Northern
Kentucky's bars, restaurants, and other workplaces.
For more information, contact the Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy at 859-323-4587.
1 Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, "Don't Let Big T ahaceD Give Ordinances the Red LIght," Fact Sheet, June 200S.
2 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, The Health Consequences a/Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report afthe Surgeon
General. 2006. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Center for Chronic Disease and Prevention and Promotion/ Office of Smoking and Health: Atlanta, GA.
3 Philip Morris. Interoffice Correspondence. Bates Document H 2022839335. January 1994.
November 2010
Smoke:fi'ee Communities: Good for People, Goodjbr BtlJSiness
Find us on Face Book: kysmokeftee
Welcome to the Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy (KCSP) Community Partners'
Newsletterl
e University of Kentucky's Tobacco-free Campus Anniversary
J News from the American Public Health Association Annual Meeting,
Denver, CO
Norm spreading or behavioral compensating- Do clean indoor air
laws increase voluntary home smoke-free rules?
Critical appraisal training to expand health literacy and reduce
health disparities
Messages that motivate rural comml,lnities to support smoke-
free policy change
o justice Is what love looks like: Quote from Cornel West
2. Smoke-free Research Update
e State-specific Prevalence of Cigarette Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use
Among Adults - 2009
3. Opposition Watch
e The Growing Popularity of E-cigarettes
e Northern Kentucky Tea Party
Please scroll down for more information on each topic!
1. University of Kentucky's Anniversary
November marked the first anniversary of the University of Kentucky's tobacco-free campus
policy. This was celebrated the week of November 15 with activities including distribution
of policy reminder cards (with free drink coupon), display tables around campus with cold
turkey sandwiches, 5-mores (llcoid turkey is not the way to go-ask for s'more information
about how to qUit"), and hot chocolate, and a campus-wide cigarette butt clean-up.
Check out kysmokefree on facebook for tobacco-free anniversary _________________ _______ -,-- Just checked fB
http://www.facebook.com/home.php 7# !/Pages/kysmokefree/121589417877279 see any plc:tures f(Om this week'- on ttJelrway?
Several members of the KCSP team attended the 2010 American Public Health Association
conference in November. Below are selected highlights from some of the sessions we enjoyed
the mostl
Arlela M. Freedman, MPH, MAT - Rollins School of Public Healthy, Emory University, Atlanta,
GA
According to the Institute on Medicine, "nearly half of all Americans - 90 million people - have
difficulty understanding and acting upon health information." So much of what we do in
tobacco control is based on print media and we may be missing a large audience who possess
low literacy and low health literacy skills. During Ms. Freedman's seSSion at APHA, she
suggested reaching out to adult education to reach those who are often disproportionately
affected by smoking and/or secondhand smoke. Adult educators are experienced in translating
information to meet the literacy skills of their participants. Adult education is also a known and
safe location where participants often have existing relationships and participants frequently
report learning from each other.
Questrons to consider:
Are you aware of the adult education programs 1n your county?
Have you ever talked with the adult education program about your smoke-free
activities?
Have you reviewed the materials you use in your tobacco control program to make sure
they are readable for low literacy audiences?
http://www.health.gov!communication/literacy/plainlanguage/PiainLanguage.htm
For a "how to" on writing easy-to-read health information:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov(medlineplus(etr.html
Norm spreading or behavioral compensating- Do clean indoor air laws increase voluntary
home smoke-free rules?
Dr. Kai-Wen Cheng, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of
Callforn;a, San Francisco
This session examined whether smoke-free laws increase the adoption of voluntary home
smoke-free rules among smoking households. The study found that smoke-free laws increase
the likelihood that family households voluntarily implement smoke-free home rules. For more
information on smoke-free homes and multi unit housing, please visit Americans for Non-
smokers Rights at
Donna Odierna, DrPH, University of California, San Francisco
The goal of this project was to implement and evaluate health literacy workshops for consumer
advocates, journalists, and healthcare providers. ability to critically appraise evidence for ____ - Comment [e2): Can you explain the conlenl
credibility and quality, and to analyze relative risks vs. the next sentence
decision-making. It is also crucial for effective communication with others, including policy 'C'"--(
makers. As a result of taking part in the workshops, participants' confidence in critical appraisal
skills increased by about 30%. Attendees reported that they were more likely to use critical
appraisal skills to identify valid sources of information, recognize financial conflicts of interest,
Additional information on health literacy training may be found at :
http:Uwww.hsph.harvard.edu/healthliteracy/practiceftrainingfindex.html
Anna Kostyglna, PhD, Postdoctoral Scholar, University of Kentucky
Focus groups were conducted with 82 residents of three rural communities to study the
perceived effectiveness of print advertisements used in rural communities to promote smoke-
free policies in regard to message framing and emotional tone. Based on the results, tips are
included below for successful media campaigns in rural communities:
Messages with a serious tone tend to be more effective than lighthearted messages
(such as jokes or cartoons).
Messages stressing the risks of secondhand smoke exposure were more effective than
those focusing on the benefits of smokeMfree air.
Messages that appear to blame smokers (ie: "Smokers kill non-smokers") were offensive
to some participants.
Messages appealing to social norms and religious beliefs received strong support from
the participants.
Visit American's for Nonsmokers' Rights for examples of smoke-free ads used in other
communities: http://www.no-smoke.orglgoingsmokefree.php7id=115.
Quote:
... "allow suffering to speak .... have the courage to question things that obstruct
justice .... unregulated markets don't work to provide justice for all."
Would workers exposed to secondhand smoke at work in your community be willing to
get involved In your smoke-free efforts? Could you use their quotes (anonymous) in a
{worker quote' document?
How can you frame smoke-free as a justice issue in your community?
See Robert Wood Johnson's summary of the APHA meeting: http://rwjfapha.com/
Research Updates
"State-Specific Prevalence of Cigarette Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use Among Adults ---
United States, 2009." Morbidity and Mortality Weekiy Report, November 5, 2010 I
59(43);1400-1406
Cigarette smoking and smokeless tobacco use cause or increase the risk for lung, throat, oral,
and other types of cancers. in the article, the CDC analyzed data from the 2009 Behavioral Risk
Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Smoking prevalence was highest in Kentucky & West
Virginia (25.6%). The prevalence of smokeless tobacco use was higher among men than women
in all states and territories. These data suggest that smokeless tobacco use is predominantly a
public hea Ith problem among men, young adults, and persons with lower education, and in
certain states:
Smokeless tobacco use among men was significantly higher than among women In an 50 states
Among the 50 states and DC, smokeless tobacco use was most common among persons aged
years
Percent of smokeless tobacco use among adults in Kentucky: 6.7%
Percent of cigarette smokers who also use smokeless tobacco in Kentucky: 7.7%
As smoke-free laws become more widespread and the tobacco industry continues to market
their products for 'dual use/ the percent of cigarette smokers who also use smokeless is
expected to rise.
http://www.cdc.gov!mmwr!preview!mmwrhtmllmm5943a2.htm?s cid=mm5943a2 w
Opposition Watch
accepted as evidenced by the article in the link below. The e-cigarette industry has launched an
organized campaign to convince the public that e-cigarettes help smokers quit. There is no
research evidence that this is the case. In fact, there is eVidence that e-cigarettes actually help
smokers remain addicted to nicotine. The U.5. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent letters
to five tobacco companies in September indicating that they were marketing their products
illegally as unapproved drugs and that the products would need to be regulated by the FDA.
htto:llnew-smoke.com/e-cigarette-news/david-Ietterman-smokes-the-electronic-cigarettel
http://www. fda.gov!ICECI!EnforcementActions!WarningLetters!2010!default. htrn ?fragment25
NextRow=51
See the attached fact sheet on E-cigarelles and Smoke-free Policies. Several local smoke-free
ordinances/regulations in Kentucky prohibit the use of e-cigarettes (Bardstown, Glasgow,
Madison County BOH regulation, amended 12/1/10).
The Northern Kentucky Tea Party is doing the bidding of the tobacco industry and other anti-
health groups (i.e., Bluegrass Institute, Kentucky Ubertarian Party, NKY Choice) to vigorously
oppose the proposed smoke-free ordinances in Campbell and Kenton Counties. Check our their
website: http://www.nkyteaparty.org/and read 'Smoking Ban Supporters Hypocritical.' The
Lexington Herald-Leader called out the Tea Party and urged Campbell and Kenton Fiscal Courts
to make the healthy deciSion in an opinion editorial this week.
http://www.kentucky.com!2010!11!30!1545933!g0-smoke-free-northern-ky.html
feedback
If you have any comments or suggestions regarding the KCSP Community Partners' Newsletter,
or would like to suggest future content for the newsletter, please let us know! We would love
to hear your feedback kcspOO@lsv.ukv.edu or contact John Johnson jdjohnson@uky.edu , 859-
323-4587.
Voluntary Participation
The KCSP Community Partners' distribution list is intended to provide pertinent information to local
tobacco control community advocates in Kentucky. If yOll have received this newsletter in error or wish
to be removed from the list, please reply to this email with REMOVE in the subject headline.
November 2010
Smolfe;-free CommuniUes: Good/or People;, Goodfor Business
Find us on Face; Book: kysmoke;tree
Welcome to the Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy (KCSP) Community Partners'
Newsletterl
1. Smokefree Policy Updates
University of Kentucky's Tobacco-free Campus Anniversary
@ News from the American Public Health Association Annual Meeting,
Denver, CO
Norm spreading or behavioral compensating- Do clean indoor air
laws increase voluntary home smoke-free rules?
Critical appraisal training to expand health literacy and reduce
health dIsparities
Messages that motivate rural communities to support smoke-
free polley change
o Justice is what love looks like: Quote from Cornel West
2. Smokefree Research Update
@ Statespecific Prevalence of Cigarette Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use
Among Adults - 2009
3. OppOSition Watch
@ The Growing Popularity of Ecigarettes
@ Northern Kentucky Tea Party
1. University of Kentucky's Tobacco-free Anniversary
November marked the first anniversary of the University of Kentucky's tobaccowfree campus
policy. This was celebrated the week of November 15 with activities including distribution
of policy reminder cards (with free drink coupon), display tables around campus with cold
turkey sandwiches, s-mores (Ucold turkey is not the way to go-ask for s'more information
about how to quit"), and hot chocolate, and a campus-wide cigarette butt clean-up.
Check out kysmokefree on face book for anniversary ________________________ /" Co.w.ment!1.11:_'Just,chl;!cked FBand I don't
http:Uwww.facebook.com/home.php ?# !/pages/kysmokefree/121589417877279 see a'ny pk;!UreS from thIs Week.,... on
Several members of the KC5P team attended the 2010 American Public Health Association
conference in November. Below are selected highlights from some of the sessions we enjoyed
the most I
Arlela M. Freedman, MPH, MAT - Rollins School of Public Healthy, Emory University, Atlanta,
GA
According to the Institute on Medicine, "nearly half of all Americans - 90 million people - have
difficulty understanding and acting upon health information." 50 much of what we do in
tobacco control is based on print media and we may be missing a large audience who possess
low literacy and low health literacy skills. During Ms. Freedman's session at APHA, she
suggested reaching out to adult education to reach those who are often disproportionately
affected by smoking and/or secondhand smoke. Adult educators are experienced in translating
information to meet the literacy skills of their participants. Adult education is also a known and
safe location where participants often have existing relationships and participants frequently
report learning from each other.
Are you aware of the adult education programs in your county?
Have you ever talked with the adult education program about your smoke-free
activities?
Have you reviewed the materials you use in your tobacco control program to make sure
they are readable for low literacy audiences?
http://www.health.gov(cornmunication(literacY}plainlanguage(PlainLanguage.htm
For a IIhow to" on writing easy-to-read health information:
http:Uwww.nlm.nih.gov!medlineplus!etr.html
Norm spreading or behavioral Do clean Indoor air laws increase voluntary
home rules?
Dr. Kai-Wen Cheng, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of
California, San Francisco
This session examined whether smoke-free laws increase the adoption of voluntary home
smoke-free rules among smoking households. The study found that smoke-free laws increase
the likelihood that family households voluntarily implement smoke-free home rules. For more
information on smoke-free homes and multi unit housing, please visit Americans for Non-
smokers Rights at http:Uwww.no-smoke.org!goingsmokefree.php?id=lOl
Donna Odlerna, DrPH, University of California, San Francisco
The goal of this project was to implement and evaluate health literacy workshops for consumer
advocates} journalists, and healthcare providers. __ ____ ___ -- Comment [e2]: Can you explain the conlent
credibility and quality, and to analyze relative risks and benefits is important for health care --_,_ of the workshops here vs. the next sentence
- that is more academic. . '
decision-making. It is also crucial for effective communication with others, including policy
makers. As a result of taking part in the workshops, participants' confidence in critical appraisal
skills increased by about 30%. Attendees reported that they were more likely to use critical
appraisal skills to identify valid sources of information, recognize financial conflicts of interest,
Additional information on health literacy training may be found at:
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/healthliteracv!practice/training/index.html
Anna Kostyglna, PhD, Postdoctoral Scholar, University of Kentucky
Focus groups were conducted with 82 residents of three rural communities to study the
perceived effectiveness of print advertisements used in rural communities to promote smoke-
free policies in regard to message framing and emotional tone. Based on the results, tips are
[neluded below for successful media campaigns in rural communities:
Messages with a serious tone tend to be more effective than lighthearted messages
(such as jokes or cartoons).
Messages stressing the risks of secondhand smoke exposure were more effective than
those focusing on the benefits of smoke-free air.
Messages that appear to blame smokers tie: "Smokers kill non-smokers") were offensive
to some participants.
Messages appealing to social norms and religious beliefs received strong support from
the participants.
Visit American's for Nonsmokers' Rights for examples of smoke-free ads used in other
communities: http:Uwww.no-smoke.org/goingsmokefree.php?id=115.
Quote:
... "allow suffering to speak .... have the courage to question things that obstruct
justice .... unregu!ated markets don't work to provide justice for all. 11
Would workers exposed to secondhand smoke at work in your community be willing to
get involved in your smoke-free efforts? Could you use their quotes (anonymous) in a
'worker quote' document?
How can you frame as a justice issue in your community?
See Robert Wood Johnson's summary of the APHA meeting: http://rwjfapha.coml
Research Updates
"State-Specific Prevalence of Smoking and Smokeless Tobacco Use Among Adults ---
United States, 2009." Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, November 5, 2010 I
59(43);1400-1406
Cigarette smoking and smokeless tobacco use cause or increase the risk for lung, throat, oral,
and other types of cancers. In the article, the CDC analyzed data from the 2009 Behavioral Risk
Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Smoking prevalence was highest in Kentucky & West
Virginia (25.6%). The prevalence of smokeless tobacco use was higher among men than women
in all states and territories. These data suggest that smokeless tobacco use is predominantly a
public health problem among men, young adults, and persons with lower education, and in
certain states:
Smokeless tobacco use among men was Significantly hIgher than among women in all 50 states
Among the 50 states and DC, smokeless tobacco use was most common among persons aged
years
Percent of smokeless tobacco use among adults in Kentuckv: 6.7%
Percent of cigarette smokers who also use smokeless tobacco in Kentuckv: 7.7%
As smoke-free laws become more widespread and the tobacco industry continues to market
their products for 'dual use,' the percent of cigarette smokers who also use smokeless is
expected to rise.
http://www.cdc.gov!mmwr!preview!mmwrhtml!mm5943a2.htm?s cid"mm5943a2 w
Opposition Watch
The Growing Popularity of E-clgarettes
accepted as evidenced by the article in the link below. The e-cigarette industry has launched an
organized campaign to convince the public that e-cigarettes help smokers quit. There is no
research evidence that this is the case. In fact, there is evidence that e-cigarettes actually help
smokers remain addicted to nicotine. The. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.(FDA) sent letters
to five tobacco companies in September indicating that they were marketing their products
illegally as unapproved drugs and that the products would need to be regulated by the FDA.
http://new-smoke.com/e-clgarette-news/david-Ietterman-smokes-the-electronic-cigarettel
http://www.fda.gov!ICECI(EnforcementActions/WarningLetters!2010!default.htm?fragment25
NextRow"51
See the attached fact sheet on E-cigarettes and Smoke-jree Policies. Several local smoke-free
ordinances/regulations in Kentucky prohibit the use of e-clgarettes (Bardstown, Glasgow,
Madison County BOH regulation, amended 12/1/10).
The Northern Kentucky Tea Party is doing the bidding of the tobacco industry and other anti-
health groups (i.e., Bluegrass Institute, Kentucky Libertarian Party, NKY Choice) to vigorously
oppose the proposed smoke-free ordinances in Campbell and Kenton Counties. Check our their
website: http://www.nkyteaparty.org(and read 'Smoking Ban Supporters Hypocritical: The
Lexington Herald-Leader called out the Tea Party and urged Campbell and Kenton Fiscal Courts
to make the healthy deciSion in an opinion editorial this week.
http://www.kentucky.com/2010/11!30!1545933/go-smoke-free-northern-ky.html
Feedback
If you have any comments or suggestions regarding the KCSP Com"munity Partners' Newsletter,
or would like to suggest future content for the newsletter, please let us know! We would love
to hearyourfeedback kcspOO@lsv.uky.eduorcontactJohnJohnson jdjohnson@uky.edu, 859-
323-4587.
The KCSP Community Partners' distribution list is intended to provide pertinent in{pnnation to local
tobacco control community advocates in Kentucky. If you have received this newsletter in error or wish
to be removed from the list, please reply to this email with REMOVE in the subject headline.
Spagnuolo. Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Thursday, December 02, 20106:39 AM
anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net
Riker, Carol A; Johnson, John D
Subject: RE: county government-owned buildings
Oh dear. I will be interested in hearing more about this. An upcoming trend. Carol/John, please let Bronson and Maggie
know that the amendment passed (and we do need a copy of it so we can update our ordinance data base).
Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-free 'Policy
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
ejhahnOO@email.ukv.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our G0Hl is to Hcdp
From: anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net [mailto:anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net]
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: Re: county government-owned buildings
One member of the group actually used his e cigarette on the sidelines of the meeting. The room was so packed
the BOH or HD people could not see what he was doing.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
From: "Hahn, Ellen J" <ejhahnOO@emaiLuky.edu>
Date: Thu,2 Dec 2010 06:22:51-0500
To: anthonys .lockard@att.blackberry.net<imthonys.lockard@atLblackberry.net >, Betsy
Janes <betsyj@kylung.org>, Tonya.chang@heart.org<I'onya.chang@heart.org>,
Jamesmsizemore@windstream.net 4 amesmsizemore@windstream.net>,
Brandi.gilley@gmail.com <Brandi.gilley@gmail.com>,
hoperoadwellness@hotmail.com <boperoadwellness@hotrnail.com>,
icenters@roadrunner.com <icenters@roadrunner.com>, Eric.evans@cancer.org<Eric.evans@cancer.org>,
jredmond@kycancerc.org<jredmond@kycancerc.org >, J ames.sharp@cancer.org4ames.sharp@cancer.org>,
1
Kercsmar. Sarah <scave2@email.uky.edu ~ abarkley@tobaccofreekids.org<1tbarkley@tobaccofreekids .org ~
Wagner, Kristian K <kkwagn3@uky.edu>
Cc: Johnson, John D <jdjohnson@uky.edu>
Scott,
This is GREAT news! I was anxious to hear about the outcome at Madison County. Our staff had put together materials
for the BOH on e-cigarettes, as well as other legal issues. We were all keeping our fingers crossed. John, Scott has a great
suggestion and one you could share with Betsy's contact.
Thanks,
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
ejhahnOO@email.ukv.edu
www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicv
www.kcsp.uky.edu
. Find kysmokefree on Twitter and Facebook !
COLLEGE OF NURSING
From: anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net [mailto:anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net]
To:. Hahn, Ellen J; Betsy Janes; Tonya.chang@heart.org; Jamesmsizemore@windstream.net; Brandi.gilley@gmail.com;
hoperoadwellness@hotmail.com; icenters@roadrunner.com; Eric.evans@cancer.org; jredmond@kycancerc.org;
James.sharp@cancer.org; Kercsmar, Sarah; abarkley@tobaccofreekids.org; Wagner, Kristian K
Cc: Johnson, John D
Good morning,
Sometimes all that has to be done is to bring the situation to the fiscal court's attention. This is what happened in
Wolfe Co. One citizen went to a fiscal court meeting and raised the issue. The fiscal court discussed it and voted
to make the courthouse smoke free. I would encourage the individual to attend a fiscal court meeting and share
his concerns with his elected leaders to see what kind of response Judge Conley gives. If Wolfe can do it, it is
possible anywhere.
I attended the Madison Co first reading last night of their strengthened regulation. There was a group there that
touted e-cigarettes as an effectIve means to help smokers quit. Their main argument was that they did not give
off any secondhand smoke or vapor that harmed others. The board held firm and the reg passed.
Scott
2
From: "Hahn, Ellen J" <f!jhahnOO@email.uky.edu>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 201008:27:36 -0500
To: Betsy Janes <betsyj@kylung.org Tonya.chang@heart.org <Tonya.chang@heart.org
J amesmsizemore@windstream.net <famesmsizemore@windstream.net
Brandi.gilley@gmail.com 43randLgilley@ gmail.com
hoperoadwellness@hotmail.com <hoperoadwellness@hotmail.com
icenters@roadrunner.com <icenters@roadrunner.com Eric .evans@cancer.org<Eric.evans@cancer .org
jredmond@kycancerc.org <jredmond@kycancerc.org James.sharp@cancer.org<fames .sliarp@cancer.org
Kercsmar, Sarah
anthonys .lockard@att.blackberry.net <lmthonys.lockard@att.blackberry .net
abarkley@tobaccofreekids.org<ltbarkley@tobaccofreekids .org Wagner;Kristian K <kkwagn3@uky.edu >
Cc: Johnson, John D <jdjolmson@uky.edu>
Good morning,
Betsy, if you want to send along his name and contact info, we are happy to conduct a community readiness assessment
with him and connect him with the tobacco control program. I am not aware of any smoke-free efforts in Morgan
County, but we will explore further. I am cc: John so he can take a look in our files.
County buildings are under the jurisdiction of the county government. Unless the fiscal court enacts an ordinance
making government buildings smoke-free (or better yet, a smoke-free law including all county government buildings),
the only other option is to evoke the ADA. We have had success with ADA letters sent to the county officials. The person
initiating the letter must be sure to have a doctor-confirmed diagnosis that confirms that he is breathing disabled: Often,
just sending the letter about the ADA violation is enough to spur county governments to make their government
buildings smoke-free. We would be happy to help him with this.
State buildings are under the jurisdiction of state law (thus, the Frankfort ordinance does not cover state or federal
buildings; nor does it cover colleges like KSU that has a board of trustees or regents). Our current state law says state
owned buildings must have a policy (it gives them the option of 'bad' policy including smoking rooms).
I hope this helps. Again, if you would like, we can follow up with him if you send along his info
Have a good one,
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.mc.ukv.edu/tobaccopolicy
www.kcsp.uky.edu
3
~ COLLEGE OF NURSING
~ OU!' Ooulla '10 Hdp Yeu tHOfll{z(; \burs
From: Betsy Janes [mailto:betsyj@kylung.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:25 PM
To: Tonya.chang@heart.org; Jamesmsizemore@windstream.net; Brandi.gilley@gmail.com; Hahn, Ellen J;
hoperoadwellness@hotmail.com; icenters@roadrunner.com; Eric.evans@cancer.org; Betsy Janes;
jredmond@kycancerc.org; James.sharp@cancer.org; Kercsmar, Sarah; anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net;
abarkley@tobaccofreekids.org; Wagner, Kristian K
Subject: county government-owned buildings
Hi Gang,
I got a message from a guy in Morgan County. He said smoking is allowed in their county courthouse. He has severe
capo and has trouble when he has to go in there. Is it correct that each county dictates policy for county-owned
buildings and that state and federal buildings are governed by different laws? If so, is there any advice you can offer for
this guy? Are there any other laws that might apply? Is there any movement in Morgan County toward smoke-free
policy? Thanks.
Betsy Berns Janes
Advocacy Director
American Lung Association in Kentucky
P.O. Box 9067
4100 Churchman Ave.
Louisville, KY 40215-1154
Office: (502) 363-2652
Cell: (502) 797-0638
betsyj@kylung.org
www.midlandlung.org
4
Spagnuolo. Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent:
To:
Thursday, December 02, 2010 6:23 AM
Johnson, John D
Subject: FW: county government-owned buildings
Can you get any media from Richmond that covered this decision in Madison? Thanksl
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our Go.;;l is- tt) Huir) You '\1jUFf;1;
From: anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net [mallto:anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.netj
To: Hahn, Ellen Ji Betsy Janes; Tonya.chang@heart.org; Jamesmsizemore@windstream.neti Brandi.gilley@gmail.com;
hoperoadwellness@hotmail.comi icenters@roadrunner.com; Eric.evans@cancer.orgi jredmond@kycancerc.org;
James.sharp@cancer.orgi Kercsmar, Sarahi abarkley@tobaccofreekids.org; Wagner, Kristian K
Cc: Johnson, John D
Good morning,
Sometimes all that has to be done is to bring the situation to the fiscal court's attention. This is what happened in
Wolfe Co. One citizen went to a fiscal court meeting and raised the issue. The fiscal court discussed it and voted
to make the cOUlthouse smoke free. I would encourage the individual to attend a fiscal court meeting and share
his concerns with his elected leaders to see what kind of response Judge Conley gives. If Wolfe can do it, it is
possible anywhere.
I attended the Madison Co first reading last night of their strengthened regulation. There was a group there that
touted e-cigarettes as an effectIve means to help smokers quit. Their main argument was that they did not give
off any secondhand smoke or vapor that harmed others. The board held firm and the reg passed.
Scott
1
. _-----_.
.----.--" .. ~ " " ~ - - - - ~ - - .. - - - - ~ - - .
From: "Hahn, Ellen J" <t:jhahnOO@email.uky.edu>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 08:27:36 -0500
To: Betsy Janes <betsyj@kylung.org >, Tonya.chang@heart.org<fonya.chang@heart.org>,
J amesmsizemore@windstream.net<J amesmsizemore@windstream.net>,
Brandi.gilley@gmai1.com <Brandi.gilley@gmail.com>,
hoperoadwellness@hotrnail.com<boperoadwellness@hotmail.com>,
icenters@roadrunner.com <lcenters@roadrunner.com>, Eric.evans@cancer.org<Eric.evans@cancer.org>,
jredmond@kycancerc.org<jredmond@kycancerc.org>, J ames.sharp@cancer.org <James .sharp@cancer.org >,
Kercsmar, Sarah <scave2@emai1.uky.edu>,
anthonys .1ockard@att.blackberry .net <rInthonys .1ockard@att.blackberry.net >,
abarkley@tobaccofreekids.org<rlbarkley@tobaccofreekids.org >, Wagner,Kristian K <ldcwagn3@uky.edu>
Cc: Johnson, John D <jdjohnson@uky.edu>
SUbject: RE: county government-owned buildings
Good morning,
Betsy, if you want to send along his name and contact info, we are happy to conduct a community readiness assessment
with him and connect him with the tobacco control program. I am not aware of any smoke-free efforts in Morgan
County, but we will explore further. I am cc: John so he can take a look in our files.
County buildings are under the jurisdiction of the county government. Unless the fiscal court enacts an ordinance
making government buildings smoke-free (or better yet, a smoke-free law including all county government buildings),
the only other option is to evoke the ADA. We have had success with ADA letters sent to the county officials. The person
initiating the letter must be sure to have a doctor-confirmed diagnosis that confirms that he is breathing disabled. Often,
just sending the letter about the ADA violation is enough to spur county governments to make their government
buildings smoke-free. We would be happy to help him with this.
State buildings are under the jurisdiction of state law (thus, the Frankfort ordinance does not cover state or federal
buildings; nor does it cover colleges like KSU that has a board of trustees or regents). Our current state law says state
owned buildings must have a policy (it gives them the option of 'bad' policy including smoking rooms).
I hope this helps. Again, if you would like, we can follow up with him if you send along his info
Have a good one,
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter and Facebo?k !
2
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OU r GtNl1 it 10 H0lp You 'rburt:
From: Betsy Janes [mailto:betsyj@kylung.org]
To: Tonya.chang@heart.org; Jamesmsizemore@windstream.net; Brandi.gHley@gmail.com; Hahn, Ellen J;
hoperoadwellness@hotmail.com; icenters@roadrunner.com; Eric.evans@cancer.org; Betsy Janes;
jredmond@kycancerc.org; James.sharp@cancer.org; Kercsmar, Sarah; anthonys.lockard@att.blackberry.net;
abarkley@tobaccofreekids.orgi Wagner, Kristian K
Subject: county government-owned buildings
Hi Gang,
I got a message from a guy in Morgan County. He said smoking is allowed in their county courthouse. He has severe
capo and has trouble when he has to go in there. Is it correct that each county dictates policy for county-owned
buildings and that state and federal buildings are governed by different laws? If so, is there any advice you can offer for
this guy? Are there any other laws that might apply? Is there any movement in Morgan County toward smoke-free
policy? Thanks.
Betsy Berns Janes
Advocacy Director
American Lung Association in Kentucky
P.O. Box 9067
4100 Churchman Ave.
Louisville, KY 40215-1154
Office: (502) 363-2652
Cell: (502) 797-0638
betsYi@kylung.org
www.midlandlung.org
3
Spagnuolo. Amy R
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Friday, November 19,20108:15 AM
To: Begley, Kathy; Wagner, Kristian K; Fallin, Amanda T; Mundy, Monica E; Johnson, John D;
Record, Rachael A; Sidney, Hilarie E; Ricks, Janelle; Robertson, Heather E; Riker, Carol A;
Darville, Audrey K; Kercsmar, Sarah; Rayens, Mary Kay; Anna Kostygina
Subject: Put on your thinl<ing cap
Importance: High
Good morning and Happy Friday!
Some of you know that 8,500 cigarette butts were collected on campus from 10-2 on Wed. This is a staggering 425 packs
of cigarettes.
I would like to write an op ed about thiS, but need your help in the message framing. Joanne Brown found me a citation
that every cigarette smoked reduces your life by 11 minutes.
So if you do the math, 8,500 butts equals 65 days per year of life lost. Essentially, smokers on our campus are living only
10 months out of every year. They are on 'permanent vacation' for two months out of the year. Another way to say it is
that smoking on UK's campus reduces life by 2 months every year.
I want to make a powerful statement about the work that is yet to be done to address the powerful addiction to tobacco
on our campus and around the Commonwealth, using the graphic depiction afforded us by the cigarette butts.
Any thoughts that you have about message framing would be helpful. I hope to get this done before the holiday.
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokeJree on Twitter and Facebook !
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OU r GOilJ !s to HBIf-J You lHOtlliZ(i Yourt::
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11 :13 AM
Jujulew
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Mundy, Monica E
Subject: RE: RIA KY: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Thanks so much! I just talked with Kelly Owens and she would like to get everything by Monday to prepare (in advance
of thanksgiving) for the BOH meeting on 12/1. Interestingly enough, she said that the Co Atty had sent an opinion that
the amendments were good to go. Our results apparently are secondary and they hope to have 1" reading on Dec I! So
maybe our main job is to stay out of their way and avoid scaring them to death about possible lawsuits.
I'll forward the Co Atty's opinion Kelly just sent, FYI, along with an interesting "timeline" from KDPH.
Kelly was most interested in getting the piece on d-cigarettes as the BOH wanted to be sure they should be included in a
clean air regulation.
I appreciate your help!
Carol
From: Jujulew [mailto:jujulew@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 11:04 AM
To: Riker, Carol A
Subject: Re: RIA KY: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Hello Carol: Let me see what I can do and I'll get back with you later today.
From: Riker, Carol A <riker@email.uky.edu>
To: Jujulew <jujulew@aol.com>
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J <ejhahnOO@email.uky.edu>; Mundy, Monica E <monica.mundy@uky.edu>; Johnson, John D
<jdjohnson@uky.edu>
Sent: Wed, Nov 17, 20109:59 am
Subject: FW: RIA KY: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Hi Judy,
The TCLC review for Madison County is in and tomorrow I will be working on a summary to go to the Health Dept with the
review. This one seems a bit more complicated than usual, especially Ihefirst part llboutEqual Protections. The best I
can figure is that TCLC is saying the oPPosition can claini that the regulation is fine as it is. since "courts have held that it is
perfectly legitimate for a legislative body to adopt an incremental approach and select one area of a problem for legislation
while neglecting others" (bottom of first page) and "piece meal or incremental smoking bans are justified" (top of p. 2). I'm
even less sure what to say about the cases on temporary exemptions (bottom of page 2), especially Hug v. City of
Omaha. Club 200, Inv. V. Rhode Island seems to make the case for getting rid of exemptions, but that doesn't.seem to
be the way TCLC was viewing that case. If you can help with that, it would be terrific.
The Due Process/T akings part seemed pretty clear and I would hope the KY Supreme Court Ruling will be reassuring in
that regard
1
Looks like TCLC thought the proposed language was appropriate in regard to ecigarettes and Hookah (BOH has received
several requests for waivers to establish Hookahs). I'm working on a one-pager on e-cigarettes for them since the BOH
wanted to be sure that it was appropriate for them to regulate e-cigs use in their clean indoor air regulation. I've attached
the draft, but I want to add some info from at least one of the sources TCLC sent, as that's the first time I've seen any
literature say that there is a "plume" emanating from the e-cig.
Of course we all know (and I'm sure this was BOH's concern in wanting a review) that someone can sue and it will cost
the BOH time and money, even if they're not successful). Don't know what we can expect from the board/county aUy so
I'd like to offer the best help possible in the summary. Also, the PH Director is new in Madison, so we'd like to put our best
foot forward.
I wasn't immediately able to find out when the materials are needed, but I expect that would be next Tuesday or Wed at
the latest. I have a call in to Kelly Owens to get a date.
Many thanks,
Carol
P.S. For later consideration (if Ellen agrees), I was thinking of other communities we're working with (like Jessamine, with
it's wonderful new cigar bar leaking smoke into the restaurant next door) and there were a couple of cases in the due
process/takings section that caught my eye. Later on maybe you could take a look at:
D.A.BE, Inc., v. City of Toledo (a 2005 case on p. 4), last sentence "and ordinance does not effect a taking merely
because compliance with it 'requires the expenditure of money.' " To my non-experienced eye it seemed reassuring that if
the cigar bar (or other establishment) thinks it needs to build a patio, that wouldn't necessarily be an issue.
Knight v. City of Tupelo (a 2006 case on p. 4-5). Last sentence: " ... it is unreasonable for business owners not to
recognize the possibility that their businesses could be subjected to the same sort of regulation." Reassuring!
Tri-Nel Management, Inc., et al. v. Board of Health of Barnstable (a 2001 case on p. 5), again, the last sentence seems to
me like something the cigar bar could claim: "economic harm alone will not suffice as irreparable harm unless the loss
. threatens the very existence of the movant's business."
Yikes!! I'd hate the cigar bar to get ahold of this one!! We dodged that bullet in Lexington because the cigar bar
quickly decided to redo its business plan.
From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 5:07 PM
To: Riker, Carol A
Cc: Mahoney, Maggie; Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Blanke, Doug
Subject: RIA KY: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Dear Carol:
Attached please find a letter providing our thoughts on Madison County's proposed amendments to its smoke-free law
and the questions posed below. Also attached are PDF's of two articles referenced in the letter which relate various
concerns about e-cigarettes that may prove useful to Madison County.
We hope our input is helpful and look forward to working with you on this and other tobacco-control issues in the future.
Sincerely,
Dave
David J. Schaibley IPublic Health Law Center
Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium
651-695-7611 I Fax: 651-290-7515
david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu
875 Summit Avenue, SI. Paul, Minnesota 55105
www.TCLConline.org
The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and
public health. The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered
2
legal advice or a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal
questions, we recommend that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.
From: Riker, Carol A [mailto:riker@email.uky.edu]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 9:40 AM
To: Mahoney, Maggie; Armstrong, Kate; Schaibley, David
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E; Mundy, Monica Ej Johnson, John D
Subject: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Hi Maggie, Kate, and David,
Madison County's smoke-free BOH regulation has been in effect since June 2007. Recently they have had 3 or 4
requests for waivers to establish Hookah businesses. On one college campus in Madisol1 County hookah is smoked
outside on campus. Apparently entrepreneurs simply set up under a tree and offer this "service." The health department
also has received several calls asking whether e-cigarettes are covered under the smoke-free regulation.
Amendments to the smoke-free regulation were proposed at the last BOH meeting (attached). Kelly Owens, Tobacco
Coordinator, has asked that we send the proposed amendments to you for your review. I'll also attach the original
regulation.
Specific questions posed by the BOH include:
1. Could there be any legal repercussions if they remove the Tobacco Retailer exemption?
2. Do e-cigarettes fit within the ordinance? (Are there hazards to the non-smoker?)
We have done a literature review and continue to search other sources, but so far have not found any air quality testing
where e-cigarettes are used indoors. Since FDA tests revealed some info about the contents of the e-cigarette cartridge
and a vapor is formed, one would imagine that some 'of these contents get into the air via the device or user exhalations,
but we haven't found any data on emissions yet. Of course, Kelly Owens would like to clean up both the tobacco retailer
exemption and the e-cig loophole while amendments to the regulation is being considered.
I know you all are swamped and we do have a little time with this as the health department needs info by late November.
Many thanks,
Carol Riker
Associate Professor
751 Rose Street
Phone: 859-323-6615
Fax: 859-323-1057
Celi: 859-619-3776
www.mc.uky.edultobaccopolicy
WWW.kCSD.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter and Facebook
3
Tobacco Control
Legal Consortium
November 15,2010
751 Rose Street
Dear Carol:
Law. Health. Justice.
Thank you for inviting us to comment on the draft amendments to Madison County's Clean
Indoor Air Regulation. As you know, the Tobacco Control Legal Consortium does not provide
legal representation or advice, and is not authorized to practice law in Kentucky. If you require a
legal opinion, we encourage you to consult local legal counsel. That said, we are pleased to offer
our comments and observations, based on our experiences with many smoke-free laws and
policies in other states.
Eliminating the Retail Tobacco Store ExemptionlNarrowing the Private Club Exemption
Eliminating the exemption for retail tobacco stores and narrowing the definition for private clubs
should assist Madison County in reducing the number of public places where smoking is
allowed. As you know, the removal or narrowin
f
of any existing exemption in a smoke-free law
brings with it the possibility that establishments who no longer qnalify for an exemption may
bring a legal challenge in an attempt to preserve their status. Two possible legal challenges are
based upon Equal Protections and Due Process/Takings grounds. Although as shown below
smoke-free laws are generally upheld against these types of challenges, Madison County may
want to be prepared for the filing of such lawsuits and the accompanying risks.
Equal Protections
Almost all challenges to smoke-free laws include allegations that the U.S. Constitution's Equal
Protection Clause, or a similar state constitutional provision, has been violated.
2
Very few of
these challenges are successful because coutts evaluate the laws under the rational basis test.
Given the burden on the challenger, and the govemment's ability to take incremental steps to
achieve public health goals, it has been difficult for plaintiffs to succeed on these grounds.
Courts have held that it is perfectly legitimate for a legislative body to adopt an incremental
approach and select one area of a problem for legislation while neglecting others. Precedent from
1 Booster Clubs, which may have been private clubs and thus exempt from Madison County's smoking restrictions,
may be inclined to bring such legal challenges if they no longer qualify for an exemption.
2 Revenue Cabinet v. Smith, 875 SW2d 873, 878 (1994) (finding that the state of Kentucky's equal protections
clause is encompassed by Sections 1-3 of the Kentucky Constitution).
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium 875 Summit Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105 USA
Tel: 651-290-7506' Fax: 651290-7515' www.tclconline.org
2
other jurisdictions states that piece meal or incremental smoking bans are justified, such as the
following cases:
Justiana v. Niagra County Dept. a/Health, 45 F. Supp. 2d 236, 242-43 (W.D.N.Y. 1999)
(The court held that a regulation, which prohibits smoking in restaurants of a certain size,
while allowing smoking in others, did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
"Legislative classifications do not have to be a 'perfect fit' for the problem they are
intended to address in order to survive rational basis review. Accordingly, a legislature .
can address a perceived problem incrementally if in its judgment that is the best way to
address the problem .... 'Evils in the same field may be of different dimensions and
proportions, requiring different remedies. Or so the legislature may think. Or the reform
may take one step at a time, addressing itself to the phase of the problem which seems
most acute to the legislative mind. The legislature may select one field and apply a
remedy there, neglecting the others. "').
Rossie v. Wisconsin, 395 N.w.2d 801 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986) (holding that a statute which
prohibits smoking in an enclosed, indoor area of a state building, but allows smoking in
bowling alleys, restaurants, and assorted other locations, does not violate the Equal
Protection Clause).
City a/Tucson v. GrezaJfi,23 PJd 675 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001) (holding that an ordinance
which prohibited smoking in restaurants but allowed smoking in bars and bowling alleys
did not offend equal protection).
Batte-Holmgren v. Galvin, 914 A.2d 996 (Conn. 2007) (holding that the Equal Protection
Clause was not violated by a law which prohibited smoking in restaurants and cafes but
allowed smoking in casinos and private clubs).
There have been cases where exemptions were successfully challenged. In both of these cases,
the plaintiffs challenged temporary exemptions and the court struck the exemptions and upheld
the smoke-free laws. While Madison County's exemptions were not temporary within the
language ofthe statute, it is removing and narrowing existing exemptions, so a challenge on
equal protections grounds may find SUppOlt in these cases:
Hug v. City a/Omaha, 749 N.w.2d 884 (Neb. 2008) (holding that Omaha could not enact
its smoking ordinance in phases, on the grounds that the Second Ordinance's exception
for casinos is much narrower than the exemptions at issue in Omaha, which excepted
stand alone bars, certain keno establishments, tobacco retail outlets and horse racing
simulcasting locations).
Club 200, Inc. v. Rhode Island, C.A. No. 05-135 (Superior Court March 31, 2005)
(issuing an injunction and declaring the temporary exemptions for certain establishments
unconstitutional because they violated the Equal Protection Clause).
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium' 875 Summit Avenue' Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105 USA
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515' www.tclconline,org
3
Due Process/Takings
The Takings Clause, fouud in the 5th Amendment ofthe U.S. Constitution and Section 13 ofthe
Kentucky Constitution, provides that private property may not be taken for public use without
just compensation. The takings arguments brought against smoke-free laws are typically based
on the flawed assertion that such laws result in partial regulatory takings, due to anticipated
negative economic effects of the laws on businesses. Opponents to smoke-free laws typically
claim that the value of their businesses will decline, and therefore, the government is taking
property without just compensation.
As you are probably aware, there is ample evidence indicating that smoke-free laws do not result
in decreased revenues for bars and restaurants? Reputable studies demonstrate that smoke-free
laws either result in no change to business revenues or actually cause revenues to increase. Only
studies financed by the tobacco industry, and therefore replete with conflicts of interest, have
purported to show that smoke-free laws result in economic losses for hospitality businesses.
Regardless, courts have consistency held that economic losses by a business, standing alone, are
not sufficient to constitute a regulatory taking.
As shown below, most courts that have considered arguments about smoke-free laws and
regulatory takings have rejected the notion that the right to allow smoking is a "property right."
Especially persuasive for Madison County's efforts is a finding by the Kentucky Supreme Court,
which rejected a takings argument brought against a smoke-free law:
In Lexington Fayette County Food and Beverage Association v. Lexington-Fayette Urban
County Government,4 the Kentucky Supreme Court upheld a smoking ban in restaurants
and bars in Lexington against a takings clause/interference with property rights challenge.
The court stated that the power to protect public health ranks at the top of the
govermnent's police powers, and where individual property rights run afoul of the
reasonable exercise ofthis power, the right ofthe individual must yield.
s
The court also
noted that during lengthy public hearings on the ordinance, evidence was presented based
on objective sales data which demonstrated "no adverse economic effect" or "improved
business" as a result of smoke-free laws.
6
(A lone dissenting opinion argued that the
health ordinance was "oppressive because it operates as a regulatory partial taking of
private property without just compensation. ,,)
7
.
3 See, e.g., Mark K. Pyles & Ellen J. Hahn, Smoke-free Legislation and Charitable Gaming in Kentucky, 18
TOBACCO CONTROL 60 (2008); Michael Eriksen & Frank Chaloupka, The Economic Impact of Clean Indoor Air
Laws, 57 CA: CANCER J. CLINICIANS 367 (2007); Benjamin Alamar & Stanton A. Glantz, Effect of Smoke-free Laws
on Bar Value and Profits, 97 AM. J. PUB. HEALTH 1400 (2007); l.P. Sciacca & M.I. Ratliff, Prohibiting Smoking in
Restaurants: Effects on Restaurant Sales, 12 AM. 1. HEALTH PROMOTION 176 (1998); Stanton A. Glantz & L.
Smith, The Effect of Ordinances Requiring Smoke-fi'ee Restaurants and Bars on Revenues: A Follow-up, 87 AM. 1.
PUB. HEALTH 1687 (1997). See also Tobacco Scam, Resource Library: Economics, available at
http://www.tobaccoscam.ucsf.edu/resource/resource_eco.cfm (last visited Sept. 13,2010) (providing a fairly
comprehensive listing of studies analyzing the economic impacts of smoke-free laws).
4 Lexington Fayette Cly. Food & Beverage Ass'n v. Lexington-Fayette Urban Cly. Gov't, 131 S.W. 3d 745 (2004).
5 Id. at 752.
6 Id .
. 7 Id. at 757.
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515' Www,tc!confille,org
4
InD.A.B.E., Inc. v. City o/Toledo,s a group of bar, restaurant, and bowling alley
proprietors appealed the district court's dismissal of their complaint alleging that Toledo's
smoke-free ordinance effected a regulatory taking of their property in violation of the 5
th
and 14th Amendments. The ordinance generally prohibited smoking in enclosed public
places, except in separate smoking lounges. The 6
th
Circuit held that the
plaintiffs/appellants failed to establish that the ordinance denied them of an economically
viable use of their respective properties. The proprietors asserted thatthey would lose
customers as a result of the ordinance. The court held that this speculative claim, even if
true, would not constitute a taking. The ordinance merely regulated the conditions under
which smoking was permitted; it did not otherwise interfere with the plaintiffs' ability to
operate their businesses.
9
The court recognized that the construction of smoking lounges
would require financial investment, but stated that "an ordinance does not effect a taking
merely because compliance with it 'requires the expenditure of money.,,,l0
In City o/Tucson v. GrezaJfi,l1 the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected a takings challenge
to Tucson's smoke-free ordinance, holding that the plaintiff failed to show that the
ordinance caused any loss in business revenue. Even if such a showing had been made,
that would not have been sufficient. As the court explained:
"legislation designed to promote the public welfare ... often places burdens on
some persons more than others." But "the deprivation of the most beneficial use
of property and diminution in value are not sufficient in and of themselves to
constitute a taking. ,,12
In DeGidio v. City a/St. Paul,13 the plaintiffs alleged that because the city's smoke-free
ordinance eliminated an exemption that had been allowed by the county smoke-free law,
a regulatory taking occurred. The court rejected this claim, holding that:
"No person can acquire a vested right to continue, when one licensed, in a
business ... which is subject to legislative control and regulation under the
police power ... [These) [regulations so prescribed and conformed to by
the citizens may be changed or modified by the legislature, whenever
public interest requires it, without subjecting this action to the charge of
intetfeling with contract or vested rights."
In Knight v. City o/Tupelo,14 the plaintiff alleged that the city's smoke-free ordinance
violated the state and federal constitutions because it affected a regulatory taking. The
8 D.A.B.E., Inc. v. City of Toledo, 292 F. Supp.2d 968 (N.D. Oho 2003), ajJ'd 393 F.3d 692 (6
th
Cir. 2005).
9 393 F.3d at 696.
10 ld. (citation omitted).
11 City of Tucson v. GrezafJi, 23 P.3d 675 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).
12 ld. at 684 (citations omitted).
13 DeGidio, et. al. v. City ofSt. Paul, File No. 62-C7-06-001899 (2"" Judicial District, Minnesota) (March 29, 2006).
14 Knight v. City of Tupelo, 2006 WL 3741879 (N.D. Miss. 2006).
Tel: 651-290-7506' Fax: 651-290-7515' lVww.tciconlilJe.org
5
plaintiffs presented testimony that the ordinance economically impacted their businesses
by causing a decrease in profits. The court concluded that "a decrease in business profits
alone is not conclusive of a taking." The court also analyzed the extent to which the
ordinance had interfered with the plaintiff's "distinct investment backed expectations."
The court found that analysis of this factor weighed against finding that a regulatory
taking had occurred, stating: "With an ever increasing number of cities and states around
the country banning smoking in public places, it is unreasonable for business owners not
to recognize the possibility that their businesses could be sUbjected to the same sort of
regulation. ,,15
In Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association v. Ohio Department ofHealth,16 the
plaintiffs alleged that Ohio's statewide smoke-free law interfered with their property
rights and effected an unconstitutional taking. Plaintiffs argued that the right to control
and use property is a fundamental right and thus the court shOUld. apply strict scrutiny
rather than rational basis analysis. The trial court rejected the plaintiffs' takings claim,
noting:
Precedent from other jurisdictions has explicitly rejected the concept that smoking
bans constitute a taking of property implicating "strict scrutiny" or compensation
analysis under the approach applicable to non-total regulatory takings.
17
Finally, in Tri-Nel Management, Inc., et al. v. Board of Health of Barnstable, 18 the
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts rejected a challenge to a board of health's
authority to pass a local smoke-free regulation. While not a takings challenge, this case
is relevant because plaintiffs, to support their motion for a temporary injunction, argued
that the regulation would cause them to suffer lost profits. The court ruled that
"economic harm alone will not suffice as irreparable hann unless the loss threatens the
very existence of the movant's business. ,,19
Any change of a smoke-free law that eliminates or narrows exemptions may result in a lawsuit,
which, whether successful or not, results in an expenditure of resources to defend the law. And
while the case law is generally favorable to Madison County's proposed changes, such
challenges could meet with success.
Prohibition Against the Use of Hookah Pipes and E-Cigarettes
The proposed revision of Madison County's definition of "smoking" appears to be worded in a
way that would prohibit the use of hookah pipes and e-cigarettes in places where smoking is
otherwise prohibited by the law. Notably, the first sentence's inclusion of the concept of
'inhalation of a tobacco or plant vapor from a heated' mechanism should ensure that hookah
15 Id. at *4-5.
16 Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Ass'n, Inc. et al. v. Ohio Dep't of Health, Case No. A0610614 (Common Pleas
Ct., Hamilton, Ohio May 2, 2007).
17 Ia. at *12.
18 Tri-Nel Mgmt., Inc. v. Bd. of Health of Barnstable, 741 N.E.2d 37 (Mass. 2001).
19 ld. at 46.
Tel: 651-290-7506' Fax: 651-290-7515 www.tc1conline.org
6
usage is considered "smoking" under the ordinance. Similarly, the second sentence of the
definition of "smoking", along with the broadly worded definition of "e-cigarette," should ensure
that e-cigarette use is prohibited.
Proponents of e-cigarettes claim these products are safer to use than traditional tobacco products,
and do not expose bystanders to the risk of exposure to secondhand smoke. Yet there remains a
lack of scientific evidence supporting these claims which has caused a growing number of state
and local governments to prohibit the use of e-cigarettes in various public places, often by
including such prohibitions within smoke-free laws,z The goal of such legislation is generally
to minimize the use of products that pose unknown health risks - particularly unregulated
products that deliver powerful drugs, such as nicotine, to the user.
Aside from the potential health risks, e-cigarettes can also create substantial enforcement
problems, especially in locations where traditional smoking is prohibited and the use of e-
cigarettes is allowed. For example, because they are similar in use and appearance, if an e-
cigarette were used in a location where traditional smoking was prohibited, others might assume
that the use of traditional tobacco products is permitted. Business owners may become confused
about which products and conduct to prohibit, while nonsmokers may become frustrated by the
use of e-cigarettes and traditional smoking products in that location. Furthermore, enforcement
officials may encounter similar frustration as they attempt to identify violators of the smoke-free
law. By prohibiting smoking as well as conduct that simulates smoking- such as use of an e-
cigarette- connnunities may be able to gain greater compliance with their smoke-free law and
more substantial health benefits for the public.
Other Sections
Although the following portions of the law are not part of the proposed amendments to Madison
County's Clean Indoor Air Regulation, they are offered as ways to further strengthen the
ordinance.
Places of Employment
Madison County's smoke-free law requires employers to maintain a written policy prohibiting
smoking in all enclosed places of employment. You may want to consider revising Section
700.403 to expressly state a prohibition against smoking in such places. Possible language could
be as follows:
Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed places of employment, including private
offices, elevators, hallways, stairs, vehicles, and all other enclosed areas.
Enforcement
Section 700.701 requires a person in control of an establishment to request that a smoker
violating the regulations stop smoking or leave the premises. You may want to consider making
it a violation of the law for the establishment to continue providing services to the alleged
smoker. Doing so may reduce the number of establishments who tacitly allow smoking after
half-heartedly requesting compliance.
20 In addition to this memo, we will forward articles that may provide Madison County with additional insights
about the marketing, prevalence, purported benefits and health concerns related to e-cigarettes.
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515 www.tclconline.org
7
Hotel Rooms
The ordinance currently allows smoking in up to 25 % of hotel rooms. If political considerations
and business opposition to the smoke-free law has changed, consider whether it is feasible to
eliminate this exemption found in Section 700.423.
Please let us know whether these comments are helpful and if we can be of any further assistance
on this or any other tobacco-law related issue.
Sincerely,
David J. Schaibley
Staff Attorney
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515' www.tclconline.org
Spagnuolo, Amy R
To:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Mundy, Monica E; Fallin, Amanda T
FW: RIA KY: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Attachments: Ann Int Med - E-cigs - Yamin.pdf; Conventional and E Cig Charateristics - N&TR - Trtchounian
- 2010.pdf; RA KY - Madison County Smoke-free law amendments - C Riker (11-2010).docx
Hi,
The TCLC comments on Madison's proposed amendments are in, along with 2 additional articles on e-cigs (one of which
says that even without combustion a plume often arises. I'll be working on a summary for Madison and may add these
two references to the ecig draft one-pager. Just wanted you to see these ASAP.
The summary may be a little more complicated than usual, but I'll get a draft going. Maybe I should send both to Judy?
Carol
------... - - - . - ~ . --.. - . ~ - - - - .. ,--
From: Schaibley, David [mailto:David.Schaibley@wmitchell.edu]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 5:07 PM
To: Riker, Carol A
Cc: Mahoney, Maggie; Armstrong, Kate; Cork, Kerry; Blanke, Doug
Subject: RIA KY: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments
Dear Carol:
Attached please find a letter providing our thoughts on Madison County's proposed amendments to its smoke-free law
and the questions posed below. Also attached are PDF's of two articles referenced in the letter which relate various
concerns about e-cigarettes that may prove useful to Madison County
. We hope our input is helpful and look forward to working with you on this and other tobacco-control issues in the future.
Sincerely,
Dave
David J. Schaibley I Public Health Law Center
Staff Attorney, Tobacco Control Legal Consortium
651-695-7611 I Fax: 651-290-7515
david.schaibley@wmitchell.edu
875 Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55105
www.TCLConline.org
The Tobacco Control Legal Consortium provides information and technical assistance on issues related to tobacco and public health.
The Consortium does not provide legal representation or advice. This e-mail should not be considered legal advice or a substitute
for obtaining legal advice from an attorney who can represent you. If you have specific legal questions, we recommend
that you consult with an attorney familiar with the laws of your jurisdiction.
1
From: Riker, Carol A [mailto:riker@email.uky.edu]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 9:40 AM
To: Mahoney, Maggie; Armstrong, Kate; Schaibley, David
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E; Mundy, Monica E; Johnson, John D
Subject: Madison County KY BOH regulation proposed amendments .
Hi Maggie, Kate, and David,
Madison County's smoke-free BOH regulation has been in effect since June 2007. Recently they have had 3 or 4 requests
for waivers to establish Hookah businesses. On one college campus in Madison County hookah is smoked outside on
campus. Apparently entrepreneurs simply set up under a tree and offer this "service." The health department also has
received several calls asking whether e-cigarettes are covered under the smoke-free regulation.
Amendments to the smoke-free regulation were proposed at the last BOH meeting (attached). Kelly Owens, Tobacco
Coordinator, has asked that we send the proposed amendments to you for your review. I'll also attach the original
regulation.
Specific questions posed by the BOH include:
1. Could there be any legal repercussions if they remove the Tobacco Retailer exemption?
2. Do e-cigarettes fit within the ordinance? (Are there hazards to the non-smoker?)
We have done a literature review and continue to search other sources, but so far have not found any air quality testing
where e-cigarettes are used indoors. Since FDA tests revealed some info about the contents of the e-cigarette cartridge
and a vapor is formed, one would imagine that some of these contents get into the air via the device or user exhalations,
but we haven't found any data on emissions yet. Of course, Kelly Owens would like to clean up both the tobacco retailer
exemption and the e-cig loophole while amendments to the regulation is being considered.
I know you all are swamped and we do have a little time with this as the health department needs info by late
November. Many thanks,
Carol Riker
Associate Professor
751 Rose Street
Phone: 859-323-6615
Fax: 859-323-1057
Cell: 859-619-3776
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokefree on Twitter and Facebook
2
Tobacco Control
Legal Consortium
November 15,2010
751 Rose Street
Dear Carol:
Law. Health. Justice.
Thank you for inviting us to comment on the draft amendments to Madison County's Clean
Indoor Air Regulation. As you know, the Tobacco Control Legal Consortium does not provide
legal representation or advice, and is not authorized to practice law in Kentucky .. If you require a
legal opiuion, we encourage you to consult local legal counsel. That said, we are pleased to offer
our comments and observations, based on our experiences with many smoke-free laws and
policies in other states.
Eliminating the Retail Tobacco Store ExemptionlNarrowing the Private Club Exemption
Eliminating the exemption for retail tobacco stores and narrowing the defiuition for private clubs
should assist Madison County in reducing the number of public places where smoking is
allowed. As you know, the removal or narrowin of any existing exemption in a smoke-free law
brings with it the possibility that establishments who no longer qualify for an exemption may
bring a legal challenge in an attempt to preserve their status. Two possible legal challenges are
based upon Equal Protections and Due Processrrakings grounds. Although as shown below
smoke-free laws are generally upheld against these types of challenges, Madison County may
want to be prepared for the filing of such lawsuits and the accompanying risks.
Egual Protections
Almost all challenges to smoke-free laws include allegations that the U.S. Constitution's Equal
Protection Clause, or a similar state constitutional provision, has been violated? Very few of
these challenges are successful because courts evaluate the laws under the rational basis test.
Given the burden on the cballenger, and the government's ability to take incremental steps to
achieve public health goals, it bas been difficult for plaintiffs to succeed on these grounds.
Courts have held that it is pelfectly legitimate for a legislative body to adopt an incremental
approach and select one area of a problem for legislation while neglecting others. Precedent from
I Booster Clubs, which may have been private clubs and thus exempt from Madison County's smoking restrictious,
may be inclined to bring such legal challenges if they no longer qualify for an exemption.
2 Revenue Cabinet v. Smith, 875 SW2d 873, 878 (1994) (finding that the state of Kentucky's equal protections
clause is encompassed by Sections 1-3 of the Kentucky Constitution).
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium' 875 Summit Avenue Saint Paul. Minnesota 55105 USA
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515 . www.tclconline.org
2
other jurisdictions states that piece meal or incremental smoking bans are justified, such as the
following cases:
Justiana v. Niagra County Dept. of Health, 45 F. Supp. 2d 236,242-43 (W.D.N.Y. 1999)
(The court held that a regulation, which prohibits smoking in restaurants of a certain size,
while allowing smoking in others, did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
"Legislative classifications do not have to be a 'perfect fit' for the problem they are
intended to address in order to survive rational basis review. Accordingly, a legislature
can address a perceived problem incrementally if in its judgment that is the best way to
address the problem .... 'Evils in the same field may be of different dimensions and
proportions, requiring different remedies. Or so the legislature may think. Or the reform
may take one step at a time, addressing itself to the phase of the problem which seems
most acute to the legislative mind. The legislature may select one field and apply a
remedy there, neglecting the others."').
Rossie v. Wisconsin, 395 N.W.2d 801 (Wis. Ct. App. 1986) (holding that a statute which
prohibits smoking in an enclosed, indoor area of a state building, but allows smoking in
bowling alleys, restaurants, and assorted other locations, does not violate the Equal
Protection Clause).
City of Tucson v. GrezaJfi,23 P.3d 675 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001) (holding that an ordinance
which prohibited smoking in restaurants but allowed smoking in bars and bowling alleys
did not offend equal protection).
Batte-Holmgren v. Galvin, 914 A.2d 996 (Conn. 2007) (holding that the Equal Protection
Clause was not violated by a law which prohibited smoking in restaurants and cafes but
allowed smoking in casinos and private clubs).
There have been cases where exemptions were successfully challenged. In both of these cases,
the plaintiffs challenged temporary exemptions and the court struck the exemptions and upheld
the smoke-free laws. While Madison County's exemptions were not temporary within the
language of the statute, it is removing and narrowing existing exemptions, so a challenge on
equal protections gronnds may find support in these cases:
Hug v. City of Omaha, 749 N.w.2d 884 (Neb. 2008) (holding that Omaha could not enact
its smoking ordinance in phases, on the grounds that the Second Ordinance's exception
for casinos is much narrower than the exemptions at issue in Omaha, which excepted
stand alone bars, certain keno establishments, tobacco retail outlets and horse racing
simulcasting locations).
Club 200, Inc. v. Rhode Island, CA No. 05-135 (Superior Court March 31, 2005)
(issuing an injunction and declaring the temporary exemptions for certain establishments
unconstitutional because they violated the Equal Protection Clause).
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515' www.tc/conlille.org
3
Due Process/Takings
The Takings Clause, found in the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Section 13 of the
Kentucky Constitution, provides that private property may not be taken for public use without
just compensation. The takings arguments brought against smoke-free laws are typically based
on the flawed assertion that such laws result in partial regulatory takings, due to anticipated
negative economic effects of the laws on businesses. Opponents to smoke-free laws typically
claim that the value of their businesses will decline, and therefore, the government is taking
property without just compensation.
AB you are probably aware, there is ample evidence indicating that smoke-free laws do not result
in decreased revenues for bars and restaurants? Reputable studies demonstrate that smoke-free
laws either result in no change to business revenues or actually cause revenues to increase. Only
studies financed by the tobacco industry, and therefore replete with conflicts of interest, have
purported to show that smoke-free laws result in economic losses for hospitality businesses.
Regardless, courts have consistency held that economic losses by a business, standing alone, are
not sufficient to constitute a regulatory taking.
AB shown below, most courts that have considered arguments about smoke-free laws and
regulatory takings have rejected the notion that the right to allow smoking is a "property right."
Especially persuasive for Madison County's efforts is a finding by the Kentucky Supreme Court,
which rejected a takings argument brought against a smoke-free law:
In Lexington Fayette County Food and Beverage Association v. Lexington-Fayette Urban
County Government,4 the KentuckY Supreme Court upheld a smoking ban in restaurants
and bars in Lexington against a takings clause/interference with property rights challenge.
The court stated that the power to protect public health ranks at the top of the
government's police powers, and where individual property rights run afoul ofthe
reasonable exercise of this power, the right of the individual must yield.
5
The court also
noted that during lengthy public hearings on the ordinance, evidence was presented based
on objective sales data which demonstrated "no adverse economic effect" or "improved
business" as a result of smoke-free laws.
6
(A lone dissenting opinion argued that the
health ordinance was "oppressive because it operates as a regulatory partial taking of
private property without just compensation"J
7
3 See, e.g., Mark K. Pyles & Ellen J. Habn, Smoke-Fee Legislation and Charitable Gaming in Kentucky, 18
TOBACCO CONTROL 60 (2008); Michael Eriksen & Frank Chaloupka, The Economic Impact of Clean Indoor Air
Laws. 57 CA: CANCER J. CLINICIANS 367 (2007); Benjamin Alamar & Stanton A. Glantz, Effect of Smoke-free Laws
on Bar Value and Profits, 97 AM. J. PUB. HEALTH 1400 (2007); J.P. Sciacca & M.l. Ratliff, Prohibiting Smoking in
Restaurants: Effects on Restaurant Sales, 12 AM. J. HEALTH PROMOTION 176 (1998); Stanton A. Glantz & L.
Smith, The Effect of Ordinances Requiring Smoke-free Restaurants and Bars on Revenues: A Follow-up, 87 AM. J.
PUB. HEALTH 1687 (1997). See also Tobacco Scam, Resource Library: Economics, available at
http://www.tobaccoscam.ucsf.edu/resource/resource _eco.elin (last visited Sept. 13,2010) (providing a fairly
comprehensive listing of studies analyzing the economic impacts of smoke-free laws).
4 Lexington Fayette Cly. Food & Beverage Ass'n v. Lexington-Fayette Urban Cly. Gov't, 131 SW. 3d 745 (2004).
5 ld. at 752.
6 ld.
7 Id. at 757.
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515' www.tc[con[ine.org
4
In D.A.B.E., Inc. v. City 0/Toledo,8 a group of bar, restaurant, and bowling alley
proprietors appealed the district court's dismissal of their complaint alleging that Toledo's
smoke-free ordinance effected a regulatory taking of their property in violation of the 5
th
and 14th Amendments. The ordinance generally prohibited smoking in enclosed public
places, except in separate smoking lounges. The 6
th
Circuit held that the
plaintiffs/appellants failed to establish that the ordinance denied them of an economically
viable use of their respective properties. The proprietors asserted that they would lose
customers as a result of the ordinance. The court held that this speculative claim, even if
true, would not constitute a taking. The ordinance merely regulated the conditions under
which smoking was pennitted; it did not otherwise interfere with the plaintiffs' ability to
operate their businesses.
9
The court recognized that the construction of smoking lounges
would require financial investment, but stated that "an ordinance does not effect a taking
merely because compliance with it 'requires the expenditure of money.",l0
In City o/Tucson v. Grezafji,l1 the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected a taldngs challenge
to Tucson's smoke-free ordinance, holding that the plaintiff failed to show that the
ordinance caused any loss in business revenue. Even if such a showing had been made,
that would not have been sufficient. As the court explained:
"legislation designed to promote the public welfare ... often places burdens on
some persons more than others." But "the deprivation of the most beneficial use
of property and diminution in value are not sufficient in and of themselves to
constitute a taking.,,12
InDeGidio v. City 0/ St. Paul,13 the plaintiffs alleged that because the city's smoke-free
ordinance eliminated an exemption that had been allowed by the county smoke-free law,
a regulatory taking occurred. The court rejected this claim, holding that:
"No person can acquire a vested right to continue, when one licensed, in a
business '" which is subject to legislative control and regulation under the
police power ... [These) [regulations so prescribed and confonned to by
the citizens may be changed or modified by the legislature, whenever
public interest requires it, without SUbjecting this action to the charge of
interfering with contract or vested rights."
In Knight v. City 0/Tupelo/
4
the plaintiff alleged that the city's smoke-free ordinance
violated the state and federal constitutions because it affected a regulatory taking. The
8 D.A.B.E., Inc. v. City of Toledo, 292 F. Supp.2d 968 (N.D. Oho 2003), aff'd 393 F.3d 692 (6
th
Cir. 2005).
9
3
93 F.3d at 696.
10 ld. (citation omitted).
11 City of Tucson v. Grezaffi, 23 P.3d 675 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).
12 ld. at 684 (citations omitted).
13 DeGidio, et. al. v. City ofSt. Paul, File No. 62-C7-06-001899 (2"" Judicial District, Minnesota) (March 29, 2006).
14 Knight v. City of Tupelo, 2006 WL 3741879 (N.D. Miss. 2006).
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515 . www.tclco1ilille.org
5
plaintiffs presented testimony that the ordinance economically impacted their businesses
by causing a decrease in profits. The court concluded that "a decrease in business profits
alone is not conclusive of a taking." The court also analyzed the extent to which the
ordinance had interfered with the plaintiff's "distinct investment backed expectations."
The court found that analysis of this factor weighed against finding that a regulatory
taking had occurred, stating: "With an ever increasing number of cities and states around
the country banning smoking in public places, it is unreasonable for business owners not
to recognize the possibility that their businesses could be subjected to the same sort of
regulation. ,,15
In Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association v. Ohio Department ofHealth/
6
the
plaintiffs alleged that Ohio's statewide smoke-free law interfered with their property
rights and effected an unconstitutional taking. Plaintiffs argued that the right to control
and use property is a fundamental right and thus the court should apply strict scrutiny
rather than rational basis analysis. The trial court rejected the plaintiffs' takings claim,
noting:
Precedent from other jurisdictions has explicitly rejected the concept that smoking
bans constitute a taking of property implicating "strict scrutiny" or compensation
analysis under the approach applicable to non-total regulatory takings.
17
Finally, in Tri-Nel Management, Inc., et al. v. Board of Health ofBarnstable/
8
the
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts rejected a challenge to a board of health's
authority to pass a local smoke-free regulation. While not a takings challenge, this case
is relevant because plaintiffs, to support their motion for a temporary injunction, argued
that the regulation would cause them to suffer lost profits. The court ruled that
"economic harm alone will not suffice as irreparable harm unless the loss threatens the
very existence of the movant's business.,,19
Any change of a smoke-free law that eliminates or narrows exemptions may result in a lawsuit,
which, whether successful or not, results in an expenditure of resources to defend the law. And
while the case law is generally favorable to Madison County's proposed changes, such
challenges could meet with success.
Prohibition Against the Use of Hookah Pipes and E-Cigarettes
The proposed revision of Madison County's definition of "smoking" appears to be worded in a
way that would prohibit the use of hookah pipes and e-cigarettes in places where smoking is
otherwise prohibited by the law. Notably, the first sentence's inclusion of the concept of
'inhalation of a tobacco or plant vapor from a heated' mechanism should ensure that hookalI
IS Id. at *4-5.
16 Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Ass'n, Inc. et al. v. Ohio Dep't a/Health, Case No. A0610614 (Common Pleas
0., Hamilton, Ohio May 2, 2007).
11 Id. at *12.
lS Tri-NeZ Mgmt., Inc. v. Bd. a/Health a/Barnstable, 741 N.E.2d 37 (Mass. 2001).
19 [d. at 46.
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-29.0-7515' www.tclconline.org
6
usage is considered "smoking" under the ordinance. Similarly, the second sentence of the
definition of "smoking", along with the broadly worded definition of "e-cigarette," should ensure
that e-cigarette use is prohibited.
Proponents of e-cigarettes claim these products are safer to use than traditional tobacco products,
and do not expose bystanders to the risk of exposure to secondhand smoke. Yet there remains a
lack of scientific evidence supporting these claims which has caused a growing number of state
and local governments to prohibit the use of e-cigarettes in various public places, often by
including such prohibitions within smoke-free laws,z The goal of such legislation is generally
to minimize the use of products that pose unknown health risks - particularly unregulated
products that deliver powerful drugs, such as nicotine, to the user.
Aside from the potential health risks, e-cigarettes can also create substantial enforcement
problems, especially in locations where traditional smoking is prohibited and the use of e-
cigarettes is allowed. For example, because they are similar in use and appearance, if an e-
cigarette were used in a location where traditional smoking was prohibited, others might assume
that the use of traditional tobacco products is permitted. Business owners may become confused
about which products and conduct to prohibit, while nonsmokers may become frustrated by the
use of e-cigarettes and traditional smoking products in that location. Furthermore, enforcement
officials may encounter similar frustration as they attempt to identify violators of the smoke-free
law. By prohibiting smoking as well as conduct that simulates smoking- such as use of an e-
cigarette- cornmunities may be able to gain greater compliance with their smoke-free law and
more substantial health benefits for the public.
Other Sections
Although the following portions of the law are not part of the proposed amendments to Madison
County's Clean Indoor Air Regulation, they are offered as ways to fmther strengthen the
ordinance.
Places of Employment
Madison County's smoke-free law requires employers to maintain a written policy prohibiting
smoking in all enclosed places of employment. You may want to consider revising Section
700.403 to expressly state a prohibition against smoking in such places. Possible language could
be as follows:
Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed places of employment, including private
offices, elevators, hallways, stairs, vehicles, and all other enclosed areas.
Enforcement
Section 700.701 requires a person in control of an establishment to request that a smoker
violating the regulations stop smoking or leave the premises. You may want to consider making
it a violation of the law for the establishment to continue providing services to the alleged
smoker. Doing so may reduce the nUlllber of establishments who tacitly allow smoking after
half-heartedly requesting compliance.
20 In addition to this memo, we will forward articles that may provide Madison County with additional insights
about the marketing, prevalence, purported benefits and health concems related to e-cigarettes.
Tel: 651-290-7506' Fax: 651-290-7515 . www.tclconline.org
7
Hotel Rooms
The ordinance currently allows smoking in up to 25 % of hotel rooms. If political considerations
and business opposition to the smoke-free law has changed, consider whether it is feasible to
eliminate this exemption found in Section 700.423.
Please let us know whether these comments are helpful and if we can be of any further assistance
on this or any other related issue.
Sincerely,
David J. Schaibley
Staff Attorney
Tobacco Control Legal Consortium' 875 Summit Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55105 USA
Tel: 651-290-7506 . Fax: 651-290-7515' www.tciconline.org
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kercsmar, Sarah
Monday, November 15, 2010 8:14AM
Hahn, Ellen J
FW: KCSP Newsletter Attachments - My apologies for duplicate email
So, how do you want to handle APHA updates? I hadn't thought of it until I read John's note - but do you want to ask
everyone who went to write a paragraph (and provide a link to the appropriate slides from the APHA website) of one
thing they learned? I kind of like the idea ...
. Thoughts?
Sarah
Sarah Kercsmar, PhD
Manager, Northern Kentucky Office
Clean Indoor Air Partnership
50 E. RiverCenter Blvd., Suite 410
Covington, KY 41011
859-261-1721 (office)
859-312-5856 (cell)
scave2@email.ukY.edu
www.mc.uky.edultobaccopolicy
~ please keep this email paperless
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 12:54 PM
To: Marijanovlc, Nina
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah; Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E
Subject: FW: KCSP Newsletter Attachments - My apologies for duplicate email
Hi Nina,
Here is October's newsletter. I'll forward September and what we have of November as well. This will give you a feel
for how they look, what is in them, etc. It looks like much of December will be completed, because the staff who just
came back from the APHA conference are going to provide content for November, so some of the content you see in
November's newsletter will be moved to December. That will make it nice for your first newsletter!
The one thing I'd like to change about this particular newsletter for example, is the names of the files. I'd like to make
the names of the files be more closely related to the articles so that it is obvious what files relate to which newsletter
items.
Feel free to ask any questions about this that you'd like. Soon we'll show you where these files are kept on Hahngroup
and our system for storing files and doing drafts.
I look forward to working with you on the newsletter!
Have a great weekend,
John
1
Sent: Thursday, October 28,2010 1:04 PM
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: KCSP Newsletter Attachments - My apologies for duplicate email
October 2010
Smoke-jre Communities: Good jar People, Good jor Business
FDA to decide how to classify e-cigarettes.
Kentucky receives national award for smoke-free laws.
2. Smoke-free Research Updates
Summary of the Article, Economic effects of Ohio's smoke free law on Kentucky and Ohio
border counties.
Summary of the Article, Smoke-free law associated with higher-than-expected taxable
retail sales for bars and taverns in Washington State.
Summary of the Article, Smoke-free legislation and hospitalizations for childhood asthma.
3. Opposition Watch
The Annual Commonwealth Freedom and Liberty Conference.
2
1. FDA to decide how to classify e-cigarettes
A lawsuit has been brought against the FDA regarding the classification of e-cigarettes. The lawsuit
claims that it is not fully understood whether e-cigarettes are "tobacco products" or a "drug-device
combination." As a tobacco product they would endure less regulation and oversight than as a drug-
device combination product. The oral arguments in the u.s. Court of Appeals were recently presented
and an outcome is pending.
2. Kentucky receives national award for smoke-free laws
The Commonwealth of Kentucky was honored on Tuesday, September 21,2010, for enacting smoke-free
laws, particularly in a state with a long history oftobacco growing and manufacturing. The communities
that passed smoke-free laws in 2009 were Campbellsville, London, Prestonsburg, and Radcliff.
Community advocates in these four communities were recognized as well as the following state
organizations: American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung ASSOciation,
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Kentucky Cancer Consortium, Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy,
and Kentucky Department for Public Health's Tobacco. Control Program. Thanks to the hard work of
community advocates and community partners, Kentucky placed 3
rd
in the nation for passing
comprehensive smoke-free workplace legislation.
1. Pyles, M.K., Hahn, E.J. (2010). Economic effects of Ohio's smoke free law on Kentucky and Ohio
border counties. Tob Control. doi: 10.1136/tc.2009.035493.
When the state of Ohio went smoke free, some reported that residents were driving to Kentucky border
counties so they could smoke in public places. This study examined whether economic activity in Ohio
decreased, while economic activity in Kentucky border counties increased. This assertion was not
supported --the economy in both sets of border communities remained at the pre- smoke-free law
level. Ohio border counties did not lose business and Kentucky border counties did not gain business as
a result of Ohio's smoke-free law.
2. Boles, M., Dilley, J., Maher, J.E., Boysun, M.J., and Reid, T. (2010). Smoke-free law associated with
higher-than-expected taxable retail sales for bars and taverns in Washington State. Prev Chronic
Dis. 7(4}A79.
Taxable retail sales were examined for bars and taverns in the two years after Washington State passed
a statewide smoke-free law. In bars and taverns, there was a $105 million gain in sales revenues in the
two years after the smoke-free law went into effect. Washington State put these funds in the general
fund, benefiting the residents of the state. By exceeding revenue expectations after the legislation was
passed, this study builds on the literature that smoke-free laws do not hurt local communities and may
actually produce additional revenue.
http://www.cdc.gov!pcd/issues/2010!juI!090187.htm
3. Mackay, D., Haw,S., Ayres, J.G., Flschbacher, C., Peil, J.P. (2010). Smoke-free legislation and
hospitalizations for childhood asthma. N Engl J Med 363;12:1139-1141.
3
In 2006, Scotland passed smoke-free legislation that prohibited smoking in public places. Prior to the
smoke-free law, hospital admissions for asthma among children were increasing at 5.2% per year. After
the smoke-free law was implemented, there was an 18.2% reduction in the rate of hospital admissions
for asthma among children. The authors concluded that smoke-free laws can Improve asthma
outcomes, beyond just those exposed to secondhand smoke in the workplace.
Opposition Watch
1. The Annual Commonwealth Freedom and Liberty Conference
The Annual Commonwealth Freedom and Liberty Conference was held at the Drawbridge Hotel and
Convention Center in Fort Mitchell, KY on October 1-2, 2010. The Bluegrass Institute, Take Back
Kentucky, and other known anti-health opponents of smoke-free air provided training sessions on topics
such as recruiting, equipping, and mobilizing an "army of informed citizens," utilizing social networking,
and influencing the legislative process. This event was also promoted by the Tea Party, a group
responsible for much ofthe organized opposition to smoke-free ordinances around the state (i.e.
Northern Kentucky Choice).
Feedback
John D. Johnson, MA
Community Liaison
859-323-4587
859-323-1057 (FAX)
jdjohnson@uky.edu
www.l<csp.uky:edu
4
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Johnson, John D
Friday, November 12,201012:54 PM
Nina Marijanovic
FW: KCSP September Community Partner Newsletter
Attachments: AF Surgeon General Memo.pdf; Strulovici-Barel AJRCCM 2010.pdf; Evans-
Whipp_Environmental Research and Pub Health_2010.pdf; sf policies should extend
outdoors.pdf
____ ..........._",. ___ ,. ...M _____ __ ___ __ __ .. _______ _
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 11:16 AM
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: KCSP September Community Partner Newsletter
September 2010
Smoke-free Communities: Good for People, Good for Business
19 Update on Northern Kentucky's Smoke-free Initiative.
I
@ Updated County Level Tobacco Use and Policy Fact Sheets are Now Available.
19 New FDA rules will greatly restrict tobacco advertising and sales.
19 The Air Force Surgeon General warns about e-cigarettes.
19 Smoke-free policies should extend outdoors.
19 Kysmoke is now on Facebook!
Introducing John Johnson, Community Liaison, KCSP.
Summary of the Article, Threshold of biologic responses of the small airway epithelium to
low levels of tobacco smoke.
1
1& Summary of the Article, The impact of school tobacco policies on student smoking in
Washington State, United States and Victoria, Australia.
3. Opposition Watch
1& Summary of Jim Waters article, Advocates of smoking bans lack sensible solutions.
1. Northern Kentucky's Smoke-free Law Closer to Reality!
On September 15, by a vote of 15 to 6, the Northern Kentucky Health Department's District Board of
Health voted to enforce the ordinances, if the counties approve it.
http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20100915!NEWS0108/9160343/
2. Updated County level Tobacco Use and Policy Fact Sheets are Now Available.
Please visit our website (see link below) to locate your community fact sheet to check out the most recent statistics
on tobacco use and smoke-free policies at the county level.
http:Uwww.mc.ukv.edu/tobaccopolicy/KCSP/UseAndPolicyFactSheets2010.HTM
3. New FDA rules will greatly restrict tobacco advertising and sales.
On June 22, 2010, a new set of regulations went into place that put severe restrictions on tobacco
companies as to when and where they are able to advertise their products. These restrictions include
banning Big Tobacco from entertainment venues, restricting sales in vending machines to adult-only stores
and placing cigarettes behind the counter in other locations, prohibiting non-tobacco giveaways with the
purchase of cigarettes and requiring that Cigarettes are sold in packages of 20 or greater. If you would like
to contact the FDA regarding this issue please go to:
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ContactFDA/default.htm
In addition, the FDA has issued warning letters concerning the manufacturing process and claims by e-
cigarette companies (see link below and attached notice). The companies claim that electronic Cigarettes,
or e-cigarettes, are smoking cessation aides.
http:Uwww.trl-cityherald.com!2010(09(09/1161912/fda-sends-warning-letters-to-e.html
The Air Force Surgeon General warns about e-cigarettes.
The Surgeon General of the United States Air Force has issued a warning concerning e-cigarettes. These
metal tubes look like a traditional cigarette while delivering nicotine through a refillable cartridge. The
Food and Drug Administration has conducted tests that determine that e cigarettes have a similar risk to
2
consumers as traditional cigarettes. As a result, the Surgeon General has sent out a statement that they
will be treated in the same category and prohibited from being used in places where cigarettes are
currently prohibited. These changes will be included in the upcoming addition of the Air Force manual on
tobacco use.
See the attached memo from the Surgeon General of the Air Force
4. Smoke-free policies should extend outdoors.
In an article published in the lexington Herald Leader on August 16, 2010, Dr. Ellen Hahn discussed the
consequences of breathing outdoor tobacco smoke. Although many smoke-free laws have been enacted in
Kentucky (including the adoption of University of Kentucky's tobacco-free campus policy in. November
2009), there remains concern over the health effects of breathing tobacco smoke in outdoor environments.
Cigarette smoke contains over 250 harmful chemicals that can cause cancer, breathing problems as well as
a host of other serious conditions. Based on the latest science on outdoor tobacco smoke, Dr. Hahn
recommends staying at least five feet away from one smoker and at least 20 feet away from more than one
smoker, depending on the wind conditions. She also urges the reader to make their home and car smoke-
free and asks people to smoke 20 feet from doors, windows, or vents to provide protection from OTS.
This article is attached.
5. Kysmokefree is now on Facebook!
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#l/pages/kysmokefree!121589417877279?ref=ts
6. Introducing John Johnson, Community Liaison.
John has begun a new position of Community Liaison for KCSP and will serve as the first point of contact
for advocates who have questions about KCSP and our resources. You can reach John at 859-323-4587
or jdjohnson@uky.edu.
1. Strulovici-Barel Y, Om berg L, O'Mahony M, Gordon C, Hollmann C, Tilley AE, et al. Threshold of
biologic responses of the small airway epithelium to low levels of tobacco smoke. Am J Respir Crit
Care Med. 2010 (in press).
In New York City, individuals 18 years and older were recruited to participate in a study looking at the
effects of lOW-level tobacco on sensitive airway tissue. Healthy non-smokers, healthy smokers and healthy
individuals who were exposed to low levels of tobacco smoke were asked to give a sample from their small
airway tissue and a urine sample which was used to test their nicotine and cotinine levels (markers for
tobacco exposure). The investigators then looked at the 372 genes that are responsible for the addiction
process and looked to see which ones were most affected by low-level tobacco use. All individuals who had
been exposed to tobacco smoke showed changes in their airway tissue.
2. Evans-Whipp TJ, Bond L, Ukoumunne OC, Toumbourou JW, and Catalano RF. The impact of school
tobacco policies on student smoking in Washington State, United States and Victoria, Australia. Int J
Environ Res Public Health. 2010j7(3):698-710.
3
High school-age students were asked about smoke-free laws on their campus. They were asked how
different factors, such as a complete prohibition on smoking on their school campus or harsh pel)alties,
played a role in their desire not to smoke. Students who had harsher rules surrounding smoking on school
grounds were more likely to think fewer of their peers smoked on campus. Overall, a combination of
comprehensive smoke-free campus policies and harsher penalties for smoking may reduce the number of
youth who engage in smoking.
Opposition Watch
1. From the Opposition Archive: A Summary of Jim Waters'ZOOS article, Advocates of smoking bans lack
sensible solutions.
The Bluegrass Institutes' Jim Waters article proposes the concept of charters (vs. smoke-free laws), where
employers are asked to place signs in their place of business informing their clients of their smoking
policy. This would allow each establishment to create an individualized smoking policy. Mr. Waters argues
that this proposed solution supports the private property rights of the employers and owners.
Waters'proposed 'solution' is a well-known tobacco industry tactic to derail smoke-free campaigns. Merely
asking businesses to post signs does not protect all workers. Rather, it gives the illusion that government is
taking action. In reality, the charter or sign age proposal is no different than the status quo.
To learn more about the opposition tactics of the anti-health groups in Kentucky, go to
http://www.bipps.org/articie.php?articie.id=378.
Feedback
kcspOO@lsv.uky.edu or contactJohn Johnson jdjohnson@uky.edu, 859-323-4587.
The KCSP Community Partners' distribution list is intended to provide pertinent information to local tobacco control
community advocates in Kentucky. If you have received this newsletter in error or wish to be removed from the list,
please reply to this email with REMOVE in the subject headline.
John D. Johnson, MA
Community Liaison
859-323-4587
859-323-1057 (FAX)
jdjohnson@uky.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
4
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON DC
MEMORANDUM FOR ALMAJCOM/CV
FROM: HQ USAF/SG
1780 Air Force Pentagon
Washington, DC 20330-1780
SUBJECT: Electronic Cigarette Use
17 August 2010
This memorandum is to alert all Ainnen about the safety concerns regarding a new type
of tobacco product. Electronic cigarettes, also known as "e-cigs," are battery operated devices
that look like conventional cigarettes. The e-cig contains a cartridge filled with nicotine, which
is delivered to the user as a vapor. Water vapor is emitted from the end of the device to mimic
the appearance of smoke. Advertisements claim electronic cigarettes are a healthier way to
smoke but one sample tested by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) contained diethylene
glycol-a toxic chemical used in antifreeze. Other samples tested by the FDA contained cancer-
causing agents yet there are no health warnings on these products similar to those seen on
conventional cigarette packages.
Manufacturers offer cartridges with decreasing levels of nicotine with the idea that they
can be used to help someone quit smoking. No studies have been done to demonstrate the safety
or effectiveness of these products as tobacco cessation aids and they are not approved by the
FDA as a drug delivery device. Commanders also need to be aware that the cartridges used in
these devices are replaceable and could be used to discreetly deliver substances other than
nicotine.
Due to the nature, appearance, and safety concerns of electronic cigarettes, they are
considered to be in the same category of tobacco products whose use is governed by Air Force
Instruction (AFI) 40-102, Tobacco Use in the Air Force. This new product will be reflected in
the upcoming revision of AFI 40-102 due out this fall. Should you have any questions regarding
the use of electronic cigarettes, my point of contact is Lieutenant Colonel Dan Kulund,
AFMSNSG30, (703) 588-7267, DSN 425-7267, or dan.kulund@pentagon.af.rnil.
& ! ~ . ~
cc: ALMAJCOM/SG
Lieutenant General,
Surgeon General
SG Doc 10-0016
Smoke-free policies should extend outdoors - News - Kentucky.com
Page 1 of 1
Back to web version
Posted on Mon, Aug. 16,2010
Smoke-free policies should extend outdoors
no safe level of secondhand smoke
Ellen Hahn
special to the Herald-Leader
Outdoor smoke-free policies are becoming more common. In 2008, most of the Lexington health-care facilities
became tobacco-free. By the end of 2010, most health-care facilities in the United States will be smoke-free or
tobacco-free.
In 2009, the University of Kentucky implemented a tobacco-free policy covering all places, indoors and out. To
date, all workplaces in Lexington-Fayette County are smoke-free inside by ordinance, and some voluntarily
prohibit smoking outdoors on the grounds as well. Some restaurants/bars have decided to provide smoke-free
outdoor dining to protect workers and patrons.
The primary intent of smoke-free campus policies is to create an environment that values the health of employees,
patients, students and visitors. Tobacco-free institutions typically provide resources to help smokers quit. For
example, UK provides 12 weeks of free nicotine-replacement products and behavioral support for those who want
to quit (go to UKY.edu/tobaccofree for more information). Many UK employees and stUdents have quit since the
policy went into effect.
Another goal of smoke-free campus policies is to protect people from breathing the nearly 250 chemicals in
secondhand smoke that are known to be toxic and to cause heart disease, cancer and serious breathing
problems.
There is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Yet many in Kentucky remain exposed. To date, 27
communities are smoke-free, and in 17 of those, local laws or regulations cover all workplaces and enclosed
public places. Most of the laws require that people smoke only at a reasonable distance from entry ways,
secondhand smoke can drift inside or can concentrate in outdoor spaces where smoking is allowed. As a result,
people who work in these outdoor spaces can be exposed to harmful levels of secondhand smoke.
There is emerging science that outdoor tobacco smoke is harmful, especially for workers who endure long periods
of exposure to smoke in confined outdoor areas. Outdoor smoke can be just as dangerous as secondhand smoke
indoors, depending on the number of smokers, how close they are and wind conditions. Servers and bartenders
who spend hours in outdoor smoking sections have significantly more secondhand smoke exposure compared
with the those working in smoke-free outdoor areas. Outdoor restaurant or pub workers who spend a Significant
portion of their time within a few feet of smokers are likely to inhale large amounts of outdoor smoke during a work
shift.
Simple separation of smokers within the same outdoor airspace does not eliminate exposure to outdoor smoke.
Depending on the wind conditions and the number of smokers, for example, there might be high levels of toxic
outdoor smoke in designated outdoor smoking areas, polluting the surrounding space. The general
recommendation is to stay at least 5 feet away from one smoker and at least 20 feet away from more than one
smoker, depending on wind conditions. Making your home and car smoke-free and asking people to smoke 20
feet from doors, windows or vents can provide some protection from outdoor smoke.
Ellen J, Hahn Is director of the Clean Indoor Air Partnership and a professor at the UniVersity of Kentucky College of Nursing and Colfege of Public
Health.
2010 Kentucky.com and wire service sources. AU Rights Reserved. http://www.kentucky.com
http://www.kentucky.com/20 1 OI08/15/v-print/1393038/smoke-free-policies-should-extend.... 9/23/2010
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Johnson, John 0
Friday, November 12, 2010 12:54 PM
Marijanovic, Nina
Kercsmar, Sarah; Hahn, Ellen J; Robertson, Heather E
FW: KCSP Newsletter Attachments - My apologies for duplicate email
Attachments: Pyles. pdf; E-Cigarettes. docx; Freedom_and _Liberty-Conference _ Oct_201 0 _FLC-
flyer-8-2-2010[1].pdf; Hahn_Press Release.docx; Mackay.pdf
Hi Nina,
Here is October's newsletter. I'll forward September and what we have of November as well. This will give you a feel
for how they look, what is in them, etc. It looks like much of December will be completed, because the staff who just
came back from the APHA conference are going to provide content for November, so some of the content you see in
November's newsletter will be moved to December. That will make it nice for your first newsletter!
The one thing I'd like to change about this particular newsletter for example, is the names of the files. I'd like to make
the names of the files be more closely related to the articles so that it is obvious what files relate to which newsletter
items.
Feel free to ask any questions about this that you'd like. Soon we'll show you where these files are kept on Hahngroup
and our system for storing files and doing drafts.
I look forward to working with you on the newsletter!
Have a great weekend,
John
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 1:04 PM
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: KCSP Newsletter Attachments -My apologies for duplicate email

October 2010

Communities: Goad for People
l
Good for Business
1
e FDA to decide how to classify e-cigarettes.
e Kentucky receives national award for smoke-free laws.
e Summary of the Article, Economic effects of Ohio's smoke free law on Kentucky and Ohio
border counties.
e Summary of the Article, Smoke-free law associated with higher-than-expected taxable
retail sales for bars and taverns in Washington State.
e Summary of the Article, Smoke-free legislation and hospitalizations for childhood asthma.
3. Opposition Watch
e The Annual Commonwealth Freedom and Liberty Conference.
1. FDA to decide how to classify e-cigarettes
A lawsuit has been brought against the FDA regarding the classification of e-cigarettes. The lawsuit
claims that it is not fully understood whether e-cigarettes are "tobacco products" or a "drug-device
combination." As a tobacco product they would endure less regulation and oversight than as a drug-
device combination product. The oral arguments in the U.S. Court of Appeals were recently presented
and an outcome is pending.
2. Kentucky receives national award for smoke-free laws
The Commonwealth of Kentucky was honored 6n Tuesday, September 21, 2010, for enacting smoke-free
laws, particularly in a state with a long history of tobacco growing and manufacturing. The communities
that passed smoke-free laws in 2009 were Campbellsville, London, Prestonsburg, and Radcliff.
Community advocates in these four communities were recognized as well as the following state
organizations: American Cancer SOciety, American Heart Association, American Lung Association,
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Kentucky Cancer Consortium, Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy,
and Kentucky Department for Public Health's Tobacco Control Program. Thanks to the hard work of
community advocates and community partners, Kentucky placed 3'd in the nation for passing
comprehensive smoke-free workplace legislation.
2
1. Pyles, M.K., Hahn, E.J. (2010). Economic effects of Ohio's smoke free law on Kentucky and Ohio
border counties. Tob Control. doi: 10.1136/tc.2009.03S493.
When the state of Ohio went smoke free, some reported that residents were driving to Kentucky border
counties so they could smoke in public places. This study examined whether economic activity in Ohio
decreased, while economic activity in Kentucky border counties increased. This assertion was not
supported --the economy in both sets of border communities remained at the pre- smoke-free law
level. Ohio border counties did not lose business and Kentucky border counties did not gain business as
a result of Ohio's smoke-free law.
2. Boles, M., Dilley, J., Maher, J.E., Boysun, MJ., and Reid, T. (2010). Smoke-free law associated with
higher-than-expected taxable retail sales for bars and taverns in Washington State. Prev Chronic
Dis. 7(4)A79.
Taxable retail sales were examined for bars and taverns in the two years after Washington State passed
a statewide smoke-free law. In bars and taverns, there was a $105 million gain in sales revenues in the
two years after the smoke-free law went into effect. Washington State put these funds in the general
fund, benefiting the residents of the state. By exceeding revenue expectations after the legislation was
passed, this study builds on the literature that smoke-free laws do not hurt local communities and may
actually produce additional revenue.
http://www.cdc.gov(pcd(issues(2010(juI!090187.htm
3. Mackay, D., Haw, S., Ayres, J.G., Fischbacher, C., Pell, J.P. (2010). Smoke-free legislation and
hospitalizations for childhood asthma. N Engl J Med 363;12:1139-1141.
In 2006, Scotland passed smoke-free legislation that prohibited smoking in public places. Prior to the
smoke-free law, hospital admissions for asthma among children were increasing at 5.2% per year. After
the smoke-free law was implemented, there was an 18.2% reduction in the rate of hospital admissions
for asthma among children. The authors concluded that smoke-free laws can improve asthma
outcomes, beyond just those exposed to secondhand smoke in the workplace.
opposition Watch
1. The Annual Commonwealth Freedom and liberty Conference
The Annual Commonwealth Freedom and Liberty Conference was held at the Drawbridge Hotel and
Convention Center in Fort Mitchell, KY on October 1-2, 2010. The Bluegrass Institute, Take Back
Kentucky, and other known anti-health opponents of smoke-free air provided training sessions on topics
such as recruiting, equipping, and mobilizing an "army of informed citizens," utilizing social networking,
and influenCing the legislative process. This event was also promoted by the Tea Party, a group
responsible for much of the organized opposition to smoke-free ordinances around the state (i.e.
Northern Kentucky Choice).
Feedback
3
John D. Johnson, MA
Community Liaison
859-323-4587
859-323-1057 (FAX)
jdjohnson@uky.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
4

.'illi 'AWe' .'. . ....... -" _,L

"ib) f0) '" f'"''7* .. ' __ '
Friday - Saturday, October 1 - 2, 2010
Drawbridge Hotel & Convention Center
Fort Mitchell, KY (outside Cincinnati, OH)
"I know no safe depository of ultimate powers of society but people themselves; and If we think
them not enlisted enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy Is not
to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education." - Thomas lefferson
Training Sessions from:
Take Back Kentucky
American Majority
Freedom Works
The 9/12 Project
Restore America
Family Foundation
Bluegrass Institute
Abigail Adams Project
10
th
Amendment Center
Institute for Constitutional Integrity
National Center for Constitutional Studies
You will learn:
---
The History & Foundational Principles of
our Constitutional Republic under God
To persuasively communicate our
message of liberty
To build an effective organization and win
To recruit, equip, and mobilize an army of
informed citizens
To master and utilize social networking
tools - Facebook, Twitter, wikl proJects,
blogs and other technology
To Influence the legislative process
Sheriff Mack - keynote Luncheon speaker (http://sheriffmack.com)
Sheriff Richard Mack, author of books ranging from gun ownership to the proper role of law enforcement.
He speaks on Constitutional issues, States' rights, and the Oath of Office. He has received national attention
in Mack v US where he prevailed at the Supreme Court, overturning the "Brady" handgun control bill.
L Brent Bozell III - keynote Patriots' Banquet !;peaker (http://www.mrc.org)
Founder and President - Media Research Center (MRC), largest media watchdog organization in America. The
MRC has made "media bias" a household term. Brent Bozell, nationally syndicated writer, appears in the Wall
Street Journal, Washington Post, Washington Times, New York Post, LA. Times and National Review.
EI!!mY: - Afternoon and evening Leadership Training and Liberty Reception; Saturday - AM Breakout Sessions,
Liberty Luncheon, afternoon Breakout Sessions, Social Hour, culminating with the Banquet and Patriots' Awards.
EARLY BIRD SPECIAL ENDS September 1st -save 30% and register today!!
Consider making It a weekend of fun, liberty, and learning. On the web http://freedomliberty.eventbrite.com
Call 859-983-5190 for Conference registration by phone. Call the Drawbridge Inn at 859-341-2800 and use the code
"FREEDOM-LIBERTY" to get your discounted room rate.
ri ,.
ri--"
Sponsored by: Kentucky 9/12 Project (www.ky912.com). Northern Kentucky TEA Party (www.nkyteaparty.org),
Heartland TEA Party (www.heartiandteaparty.com). Citizens for a Christian Constitutional Commonwealth
Appeals Court May Duck E-Cig Key Issue - ARGUMENT THURS
FDA Provides Better Alternative Cases to Decide FDA's Powers
Although the e-cigarette [e-cig] industry is eagerly awaiting oral argument Thursday
before the U.S. Court of Appeals, hoping to get some inkling of how the court will rule
concerning the Food and Drug Administration's [FDA] power to regulate their product,
the appellate court may sidestep that key issue and postpone judgment by focusing on
procedural problems with the case, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf,
who was a party to the proceeding in the lower court.
Instead of deciding whether the FDA must regulate e-cigs as "tobacco products" or as
a "drug-device combination," the court may well conclude that this Issue is not
properly raised in these convoluted and long delayed proceedings, especially since the
FDA has just created several new proceedings in which the legal issue is more properly
raised, and has been ruled upon in a more final proceeding at a much higher agency
level.
The case, now called Sottera, Inc. v. FDA [10-5032], was originally brought by another
company known as Smoking Everywhere. It challenged the authority of the FDA to
prevent imports of its e-cigarettes. Under the then-existing law, the FDA could do this
only if e-cigs were drug-device combination devices since the agency, under a prior
U.S. Supreme Court decision, had no jurisdiction over tobacco products like cigarettes,
chewing tobacco, etc.
However, Congress subsequently passed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco
Control Act which gave the FDA authority to regulate tobacco products. Thus, all
parties now agree that the FDA has the authority to regulate e-cigsj the only legal
issue is under what category they fall. As drug-device combination devices they must
meet difficult regulatory hurtles, while as "tobacco products" they would be less strictly
regulated.
Also, because Smoking Everywhere is no longer a party to the case, there may be
much less reason to rule on the central legal issue.
Before appellate cou rts rule on -- much less decide to reverse -- a decision by a major
federal regulatory agency, they usually want to be sure that the agency itself has in
fact already decided the precise legal issue, and that it did so finally and at a very high
level in the agency not likely to be changed later.
Here, Sottera, the only company remaining in the case, may have had some e-cig
imports interfered with, but only at the most preliminary level -- a notice of
"Detention" -- which is only the first of many steps to the process towards a final
agency decision. Moreover, any such interference occurred long before the Tobacco
Control Act became effective, so it is not at all clear that the FDA made a
determination about how such products would be regulated under the Act, or that the
decision which was made was sufficiently final,or made at a sufficiently high agency
level, to warrant judicial review.
Thus, says Prof. Banzhaf, who teaches Administrative Law, the court may decide that
the issue of how e-cigs should be regulated by the FDA under the Act is not ripe for
review at this time because the agency has either never ruled on this legal issue, or did
so only in a very preliminary fashion and at a very low agency level.
In sharp contrast, and perhaps not just by coincidence, the FDA has just sent letters
on the eve of oral argument to several e-cig companies. These letters assert that their
products must, under the Act, be regulated as drug-device combination devices rather
than as tobacco products.
These letters appear to be far more conclusive than the notice of Detention which may
have been applied to Sottera under the old law, and is signed by a high agency official:
Janet Woodcock, M.D., Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
These letters might have been sent by the FDA, just prior to the oral argument, to help
convince the court that a law suit based upon the actions taken with regard to these
companies, rather than the doubtful action taken almost two years ago regarding
Sottera, provide a much better legal basis for judicial review.
In other words, the court might find that it can dispose of the Sottera situation without
reaching the key underlying issue based upon common administrative law principles
like lack of ripeness, failure to exhaust the administrative remedies which the FDA
provides, the absence of final agency action, and even mootness.
"Any such attempt by the court to dispose of the case without reaching the issue of the
FDA's jurisdiction over e-cigs under the newly-passed statute would be very
disappointing to the many e-cig companies following this proceeding, but it is
consistent with a court's reluctance to overrule an agency, especially on a matter
related to the public health, before it is necessary to do so, and then only if the record
is complete," says Banzhaf.
This proceeding, Sottera, Inc. v. FDA [10-5032], will be argued before the u.s. Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shortly after 10:00 AM on Thursday,
September 23, 2010, in Courtroom 11 on the fifth floor of the E. Barrett Prettyman
United States Courthouse at Third Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington,
D.C. It is located one block west of the United States Capitol. The building faces
Constitution Avenue where Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues have merged.
PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III
Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor,
FELLOW, World TeChnology Network, and
Executive Director and Chief Counsel
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
America's First Antismoking Organization
2013 H Street,NW
Washington, DC 20006, .USA
(202) 659-4310// (703) 527-8418
Internet: http://ash.orgf
Twitter: http://twitter.com/AshOrg
UK.
UNIVERSITY OF
KENTUCKY"
Public Relations
& Marketing
NEWS
www.uky.edu/PR
CONTACT: Ann Blackford, (859) 257-1754, ext. 230
ann.blackford@uky.edu
FOR RELEASE
Kentucky Honored for Smoke-free Laws
UK College of Nursing's Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy
Key Partner in Smoke-free Efforts
LEXINGTON, Ky.(Sept. 20, 2010) - The Commonwealth of Kentucky will receive
an award tomorrow for placing 3rd in the nation for passing strong, 100 percent smoke-
free laws. The University of Kentucky College of Nursing's Kentucky Center for Smoke-
free Policy and key partner organizations continue to advocate for comprehensive
smoke-free laws in Kentucky. Currently, 30.6% of Kentucky's population is covered by
100 percent smoke-free laws, compared to 46.9% in the U.S.
The Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy provides rural and urban
communities across Kentucky with science-based strategies for advancing smoke-free
policies on the local level and educates citizens and policymakers about the importance
of smoke-free environments.
"Elected officials and committed advocates from 17 progressive Kentucky
communities deserve this award for stepping up to do the right thing by ensuring that all
workers breathe clean air while on the job," said Ellen Hahn, director of the Kentucky
Center for Smoke-free Policy ..
The award will be. presented during the Rural Smoke-free Communities Project
Leadership Exchange Conference titled "Smoke-free: Let the Games Begin." The
see blue.
AnEquai Oppommity Uniwsity
award will be presented during lunch by the American's for Nonsmokers' Rights
Executive Director, Cynthia Hallett.
"Passing strong local laws is no easy task, and Kentucky has our deepest
respect and admiration for this impressive accomplishment, particularly given its history
as a tobacco growing and manufacturing state," Hallett said. "We hope the state will
continue to be a leader in the passage of local smoke free laws, and accomplishing our
collective public health goal of protecting nonsmokers' from the health hazards of
secondhand smoke."
In addition to the Kentucky Center for Smoke-free Policy at UK, partners include
the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, the American Cancer Society, the American Lung
Association, the American Heart Association, the Kentucky Department for Public
Health's Tobacco Program, and the Kentucky Cancer Consortium.
Cigarette smoking remains the single most preventable cause of death in the
United States accounting for approximately 1 out of every 5 deaths each year. Kentucky
is a national leader in adult cigarette smoking at 25.6 percent, and spends an estimated
$1 .17 billion per year treating sick smo kers.
The Rural Smoke-free Communities Project Leadership Exchange Conference
Award Ceremony will be held at 11 :30 on Tuesday, Sept. 21 at the Doubletree Suites in
Lexington, Ky.
###
We "s", Hue" at the weI<: hommt on/ytnpmmhouseruskethdl am the i:e;tifinteraiJeiateathletics; w/realso
mtiomlly ranked in tmre than 70 aaulerricfJI'Wam. we're chartirg anag;;re;si'U?, fXcitirgpath tmlJZed /mJrnirg a Top 20 public re;earrh
institution. "s", Hue is a lot if thing;, but rm;t if all about hdpirg studmts realize their potenthl am halr""S the jXJIN!r if their
cirram. Fortmreabout UK's <!forts tnberorrea Top 20 uniwsiJyamhowue "s", Hue," 7.isitwwwulryaiuIOPBPAlbusims-pianhtm
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 6:50 PM
Riker, Carol A
Subject: RE: Ecig
roughly 10-1 - see you then!
John D. Johnson
PhD Student, Department of Sociology
1505 Patterson Office Tower
Lexington, KY 40506
jdjohuson@uky.edu
The aim of education is life lived to its fullest.
-David Orr
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 4:58 PM
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: RE: E cig
When are you in on Friday? See you then!
Sent: Wednesday, November 10,20101:59 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Cc: Riker, Carol A; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: E cig
Hi Ellen,
I don't think that will be a problem - HI try to take a look soon at what we have so far and go from there.
I look forward to seeing you on Friday,
John
John D. Johnson
Lexington, KY 40506
jdjohnson@uky.edu
1
- David Orr
From: Halm, Ellen J
Sent: Wednesday, November 10,2010 8:39 AM
To: Jolmson, Jolm D
Subject: FW: E cig
Jolm,
You have probably heard that Erin has resigned. I think she had started the November newsletter. Would you be
willing to pick up for this month and work on it (with our help of course, and only until we can get a new RA
hired and oriented). Given that November is Lung Cancer Awareness Month, I think we can certainly pick up
on that theme and include the link to UK \; tobacco free anniversary events next week (there will be a press
release we can lil)k to ... ).
Also, the link below to an e-cig site is disturbing given that David Letterman showcased an e-cig (even smoked
it on air) on his show. We need to have a segment about e-cigs under the Opposition Watch segment, alerting
the reader to this.
I know we are finally due to meet on Friday (yeah!) and we can talk about this. Thanks for all your help!
Ellen
Ellen J. Halm, PhD, RN
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
ejhahnOO@email.uky.edu .
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Begley, Kathy
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: E cig
Thought you might find this interesting.
http://new-smoke.comle-cigarette-news/david-letterman-smokes-the-electronic-cigarettel
2
Sent from Kathy.'s iPhone
3
Spagnuolo. Amy R
From: Johnson, JohnD
Sent:
To:
Wednesday, November 10, 2010 1 :59 PM
Hahn, Ellen J
Cc:
Subject:
Riker, Carol A; Kercsmar, Sarah
RE: Ecig
Hi Ellen,
I don't think that will be a problem - 111 try to take a look soon at what we have so far and go from there.
I look forward to seeing you on Friday,
John
John D. Johnson
Lexington, KY 40506
jdjohnson@uky.edu
-David Orr
From: Hahn, Ellen J
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: FW: E cig
John,
on that theme and include the link to UK's tobacco free anniversary events next week (there will be a press
release we can link to ... ).
Also, the link below to an e-cig site is disturbing given that David Lettennan showcased an e-cig (even smoked
it on air) on his show. We need to have a segment about e-cigs under the Opposition Watch segment, alerting
the reader to this.
Ellen
1
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.mc.uky .edultobaccopolicy
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Begley, Kathy
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: E cig
http://new-smoke.com/e-cigarette-news/david-lettennan-smokes-the-electronic-cigarettel
Sent from Kathy's iPhone
2
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Thursday, November 11, 20109:54 AM
Riker, Carol A
Subject: RE: Ecig
Attachments: 2 - Fact Sheet 6 Major Conclusions 2007.pdf
And another from the SG 6 major conclusions fact sheet:
Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke.
Supporting Evidence .
o
Secondhand smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic (cancer-causing),
including formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, arsenic, ammonia, and hydrogen cyanide.
o
Secondhand smoke has been designated as a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing agent) by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on
Cancer (IARC). The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has concluded that secondhand
smoke is an occupational carcinogen.
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 9:23 AM
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: RE: E cig
Yes, I have that printed and will re-look at it. Thx.
Carol
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 20101:57 PM
To: Riker, Carol A; Hahn, Ellen J
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: E cig
Hi Carol,
HI see what I can find. There is a bit ofthat in the article I found earlier when we were looking at e-cigs. I
don't think I have access to that now, but you might look for that - it was the mystery article I found when we
were doing research on this a little earlier.
See you soon,
John
John D. Johnson
1
Lexington, KY 40506
jdjohnson@uky.edu
-DavidOrr
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D
Cc: Kercsmal', Sarah
Subject: RE: E cig
John
I'm working on a precursor to an e-cig one-pager because I need info to send Madison HD and Franldin Co
Schools. I think there is one more piece of info I'd like to cite from the literature and that is to document that
smokers exhale nicotine and other substances (I think that is the ''mainstream smoke"?). I believe that info may
be in the Surgeon General's report in one of the early chapters about secondhand smoke. The info may be in one
of the articles that I sent you recently about nicotine dependence from SHS, too. If you get time to look before I
do, please let me know what you find. If not, 111 be able to get back to it tomorrow, so ifthis is a big distraction,
then d o n ~ let it interfere with your priorities :)
Thanks,
carol
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Wednesday, November 10,20108:40 AM
To: Johnson, John D
SUbject: FW: E cig
John,
Also, the link below to art e-cig site is disturbing given that David Lettennan showcased an e-cig (even smoked
it on air), on his show. We need to have a segment about e-cigs under the Opposition Watch ,segment, alerting
the reader to this.
Ellen
2
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Begley, Kathy
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: E cig
http://new-smoke.com/e-cigarette-news/david-lettetmau-smokes-the-electronic-cigarettel
3
6 Major Conclusions of the Surgeon General Report
Smoking Is the single greatest avoidable cause of disease and death. In this report
j
The Health Consequences of
Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General, the surgeon General has concluded that:
1. Many millions of Americans, both children and adults, are still exposed to secondhand smoke In their homes
and workplaces despite substantial progress In tobacco control.
Supporting Evidence
o Levels of a chemical called cotinlne, a biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure, fell by 70 percent
from 1 9 8 8 ~ 9 1 to 200102.. In national surveys, however, 43 percent of U.S. nonsmokers stlll have
detectable levels of cotlnine.
o Almost 60 percent of U.S. children aged 3-11 years-or almost 22 million children-are exposed to
secondhand smoke.
o Approximately 30 percent of Indoor workers in the United States are not covered by smoke-free
workplace policies.
2. Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death In Children and adults who do not smoke.
Supporting Evidence
o Secondhand smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic (cancer-
causing), induding formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, arsenic, ammonIa, and hydrogen cyanide.
o Secondhand smoke has been designated as a known hUman carcinogen (cancer-causing agent) by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Toxicology Program and the InternatIonal Agency for
Research on Cancer (lARG). The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has concluded that
secondhand smoke is an occupational carcinogen. >
3. Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS),
acute respiratory Infections, ear problems, and more severe asthma. SmOking by parents causes respiratory
symptoms and slows lung growth in their children.
Supporting Evidence
o Children who are exposed to secondhand smoke are inhaling many of the same cancer-caUSing
substances and poisons as smokers. Because their bodIes are developing, Infants and young ch1!dren are
especially vulnerable to the poisons in secondhand smoke.
o Both babies whose mothers smoke while pregnant and babies who are exposed to secondhand smoke
after birth are more likely to die from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) than babies who are not
exposed to cigarette smoke.
o Babies whose mothers smoke while pregnant or who are exposed to secondhand smoke after birth
have weaker lungs than unexposed babies, which Increases the risk for many health problems.
o Among Infants and children, secondhand smoke cause bronchitIs and pneumonia, and increases the
risk of ear infections.
o Secondhand smoke exposure can cause Children who already have asthma to experience more
frequent and severe attacks.
4. Exposure of adults to secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and
causes coronary heart disease and lung cancer.
Supporting Evidence
o Concentrations of many cancer-causing and toxic chemicals are higher In secondhand smoke than in
the smoke Inhaled by smokers.
o Breathing secondhand smoke for even a short time can have Immediate adverse effects on the
cardiovascular system and interferes with the normal functioning of the heart, blood, and vascular systems
in ways that increase the risk of a heart attack.
o Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or at work Increase their rIsk of
developing heart disease by 25 - 30 percent.
o Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or at work increase their risk of
developing lung cancer by 20 - 30 percent.
5. The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.
Supporting Evidence
o Short exposures to secondhand smoke can cause blood platelets to become stickIer, damage the
linIng of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability,
potentially IncreasIng the risk of a heart attack,
o Secondhand smoke contaIns many chemicals that can quickly irritate and damage the lining of the
airways. Even brief exposure can result In upper airway changes in healthy persons and can lead to more
frequent and more asthma attacks in children who already have asthma.
6. Eliminating smoking In Indoor spaces fully protects nonsmokers from exposure to secondhand smoke.
Separating smokers from nonsmokers, cleaning the air, and ventilating buildings cannot eliminate exposures of
nonsmokers to secondhand smoke.
Supporting Evidence
o Conventional aIr cleaning systems can remove large particles
l
but not the smaller particles or the
gases found In secondhand smoke.
o Routine operation of a heating, ventilating, and airtondltloning system can distrIbute secondhand
smoke throughout a building.
o The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), the
preeminent U,S. body on ventllatlon issues, has conduded that ventilation technology cannot be relied on
to control health risks from secondhand smoke exposure,
The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General was prepared by
the Office on SmokIng and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease PreventIon and Health Promotion, Centers for
DIsease Control andPrevention (CDC). The Report was written by 22 national experts who were selected as primary
authors. The Report chapters were reviewed by 40 peer reViewers, and the entire Report was reviewed by 30
Independent scIentists and by lead scientists within the Centers for DIsease Control and Prevention and the Department
of Health and Human Services. Throughout the review process, the Report was revised to address reviewers' comments.
Citation
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A
Report of the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/ Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, National Center for ChronIc Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
l
Office on Smoking and Health/ 2006,
For more Information/ please refer to the Resources page. Addltlonal highlight she{Jts are also available at www cdc.gov/tobacco,
last reVIsed: January 4, 2007
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Thursday, November 11, 2010 9:50 AM
Riker, Carol A
Subject: RE: Ecig
Here's something from the 1986 SG report, which is cited in the 2006 report in the toolkit. Not sure if this is
helpful...
http://profiles.nlm.nih.govINNIBIC/PIMUnnbcpm.pdf
tobacco smoke causes disease.
More recently, the effects of the inhalation of environmental tobacco smoke by nonsmokers have become a
pressing public health concern. Nonsmokers, as well as active smokers, inhale environmental tobacco smoke,
the mixture of sidestream smoke and exhaled mainstream smoke. Various tenus have been applied to the
inhalation of environmental tobacco smoke by nonsmokers; the terms "involuntary smoking" and "passive
smoking" are the most prevalent and are often used interchangeably by researchers and the public.
Many of the known toxic and carcinogenic agents found in mainstream cigarette smoke have also been
demonstrated to be present in sidestream smoke. Furthenuore, the combustion conditions under which
sidestream smoke is produced result in the generation of larger amounts of many of these toxic and
carcinogenic agents per gram of tobacco burned than the conditions under which mainstream smoke is
generated (see Chapter 3). The characteristics of environmental tobacco smoke also differ from those of
mainstream smoke because the sidestream smoke ages before it is inhaled and the mainstream smoke exhaled
by the active smoker is modified during its residence in the lung. There is no evidence to suggest that
environmental tobacco smoke has a qualitatively lower toxicity or carcinogenicity than mainstream smoke per
milligram of smoke inhaled. In fact, the available evidence suggests that sidestream smoke contains higher
concentrations of many known toxic and carcinogenic agents per milligram of smoke and is more tumorgenic
than mainstream smoke in animal testing (Wynder and Hoff'mann 1967). As a result, involuntary smoking
should not be viewed as a qualitatively different exposure from active smoking, but rather as a lowdose
exposure to a known hazardous agent-cigarette smoke.
Sent: Thursday, November 11,20109:23 AM
To: Johnson, John D
SUbject: RE: E cig
Yes, I have that printed and will re-Iook at it. Thx.
Carol
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 1:57 PM
To: Riker, Carol A; Hahn, Ellen J
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: E cig
1
Hi Carol,
In see what I can find. There is a bit of that in the article I found earlier when we were looking at e-cigs. I
don t think I have access to that now, but you might look for that - it was the mystery article I found when we
were doing research on this a little earlier.
See you soon,
John
John D. Johnson
Lexington, KY 40506
jdjohnson@uky.edu
- David Orr
Sent: Wednesday, November 10,201010;54 AM
To: Hahn, EllenJ; Johnson, JohnD
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah
SUbject: RE: E cig
John
I'm working on a precursor to an e-cig one-pager because I need info to send Madison HD and Franklin Co
Schools. I think there is one more piece of info I'd like to cite from the literature and that is to document that
smokers exhale nicotine and other SUbstances (I think that is the "mainstream smoke "?). I believe that info may
be in the Surgeon General's report in one of the early chapters about secondhand smoke. The info may be in one
of the articles that I sent you recently about nicotine dependence from SHS, too. If you get time to look before I
do, please let me know what you find. Ifnot, I'll be able to get back to it tomorrow, so if this is a big distraction,
then dont let it interfere with your priorities :)
Thanks,
carol
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Wednesday, November 10,2010 8:40 AM
To: Johnson, John D
SUbject: FW: E cig
John,
2
Also, the link below to an e-cig site is distnrbing given that David Letterman showcased an e-cig (even smoked
'it on air) on his show. We need to have a segment about e-cigs under the Opposition Watch segment, alerting
the reader to this.
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Begley, Kathy
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 20103:14 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: E cig
http;1 Inew-smoke.com/e-cigarette-news/david -letterman-smokes-the-electronic-cigarettel
3
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Importance:
Hahn, Ellen J
Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:01 AM
Marijanovic, Nina; Kercsmar, Sarah
FW: Feb Newsletter Outline
Minnesota Econ Study Prev Science Jan 09.pdf
High
See my comments below about the Feb. newsletter (scroll down to the comments about the outline). I noticed that the
second study was left off-Minnesota economic study (attached-sorry, I said Wisconsin below). Did you leave that off
for a reason?
Actually, as I review the outline below and the newsletter, it does not follow the approved outline. I will give feedback
on the version on sharepoint, but can you please update as per the outline below?
Nina, I would like to talk with you this week. How is 4:00 on Thursday?
Thanks,
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
~
_ . m . ~ Find kysmokejree on and
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 3:45 PM
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: Feb Newsletter Outline
How about the Friday before since Nina works late in the week? That way, we will have time to review.
"1
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Ollr Goal iii 1;;\ Help 'you fiQaliz,l \0,lr3
Sent: Monday, January 31,201110:26 AM
Ce: Kercsmar, Sarah
Looks great to me - thanks for being ahead on the February newsletter, Nina!
As usual there may be last minute details we'll have to be sensitive to as Sarah has pointed out.
Perhaps we could set a goal to have it ready by around February 21 and send it by then or shortly thereafter?
Thanks,
John
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 3:53 PM
Ce: Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Nina,
I also am cc: Sarah Kercsmar. Sarah and John, Nina and I talked about her sending us an 'outline' for the newsletter by
the end of every month. The one below is for February. Thoughts? See my thoughts below. Good job, Nina.
Ellen
2
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Out Goal is to Holp 'fbu 'fin'S
Sent: Friday, January 28,2011 2:14 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Cc: Johnson, John D
Subject: Feb Newsletter Outline
Afternoon- Rough outline for the Feb. Newsletter.
Thanks!
I. Updates:
a. Campbell Co. upcoming vote.
b. Bullitt County Board of Health regulation (scheduled for first reading Feb. 16-see Carol Riker for
language)
c. Smokefree Kentucky (we need to include a link to www.smokefreekentucky.org to encourage
readers to sign up for information and action alerts-there may be other updates as well)
II. In the news:
a. NY bill to ban e-cigs until FDA action
I. http://online.wsj.com/articie/APdle46ddc29014f36b309c6bce4651f15.html
b. Judge Rules No smoking in Nebraska cigar bars or hotels
III. Voices of Smoke Free Communities
a. Second round of promos.
IV. Literature Review
a. Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control: A step forward or a
repeat of past mistakes?
i. Zachary Cahn and Michael Siegel
b. Exploring differences in smokers' perceptions of the effectiveness of cessation media messages.
(would rather focus on smoke-free papers---maybe the latest economic study from Wisconsin?)
i. Kevin C Davis, James M Nonnemaker, Matthew C Farrelly, et al.
v. Opposition Watch
a. E-cig (we could explore the 'facts' of this industry and perhaps use the 'American Blue Tip' commercial
and insert the link for members to watch)
VI. Misc.
a. 'Save the date' for Spring Conference
3
College of Nursing
519 CON Building
859.323.4599
~
_-m.1\lIiq Find kysmokefree on and
4
Spagnuolo. Amy R
Sent:
To:
Tuesday, February 22, 2011 9:02 PM
Hahn, Ellen J
That's fine ... just call when it's convenient. It's Joe's birthday tomorrow, but we should be around.
Co-Director, Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 8:46 PM
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Sorry. Just now seeing this. I am in Frankfort all AM. I can talk late PM tomorrow.
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.ukv.edu
~
- .... 1\IIi<y Find kysmokefree on and
1
COLLEGE OF NURSING
01.1 r Gv<!I i$ to riolp You ,b\0al itJ 'fblW"
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 2:18 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Yep. You in the office now? I can call you.
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 201112:35 PM
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: Re: Feb Newsletter Outline
Trying. Can we talk before I meet with her?
Ellen J. Hahn, PhD
Professor, UK CON
859-257-2358
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tue Feb 22 11:11:072011
I see you are documenting things on Nina now to have a good flavor of her work over time, yes?
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
2
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 201111:11 AM
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: Re: Feb Newsletter Outline
I spent way too much time on this today!! And still did not finish
Ellen J. Hahn, PhD
Professor, UK CON
859-257-2358
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tue Feb 22 11:08:392011
It completely slipped my mind that she had created an outline that she was supposed to be abiding to! Sorry for not
comparing the draft to the outline!
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:33 AM
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Marijanovic, Nina; Kercsmar, Sarah
Importance: High
I stopped editing at Tobacco in the News. Can you please work on this and I will take another look on Thursday?
3
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
~ - ..
~ ~
-{ .. ~ Find kysmokefree on
and _
COLLEGE OF NURSING
au f Ge>!.!lls to HBlp You iRoal tzO 'ft'UrG;
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 10:01 AM
To: Marijanovic, Nina; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: FW: Feb Newsletter Outline
Importance: High
See my comments below about the Feb. newsletter (scroll down to the comments about the outline). I noticed that the
second study was left off-Minnesota economic study (attached-sorry, I said Wisconsin below). Did you leave that off
for a reason?
Actually, as I review the outline below and the newsletter, it does not follow the approved outline. I will give feedback
on the version on sharepoint, but can you please update as per the outline below?
Nina, I would like to talk with you this week. How is 4:00 on Thursday?
Thanks,
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
4
!(sp
_"r<o/olity Find kysmokefree on and
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Monday, January 31,2011 3:45 PM
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah
How about the Friday before since Nina works late in the week? That way, we will have time to review.
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Om G001 is to riclp You Fl(;alizo )fJurs
Sent: Monday, January 31, 201110:26 AM
Cc: Kercsmar, Sarah
Looks great to me - thanks for being ahead on the February newsletter, Nina!
As usual there may be last minute details we'll have to be sensitive to as Sarah has pointed out.
Perhaps we could set a goal to have it ready by around February 21 and send it by then or shortly thereafter?
Thanks,
5
John
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2011 3:53 PM
Nina,
I also am cc: Sarah Kercsmar. Sarah and John, Nina and I talked about her sending us an 'outline' for the newsletter by
the end of every month. The one below is for February. Thoughts? See my thoughts below. Good job, Nina.
Ellen
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopollcy
www.kcsp.uky.edu
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Our Goal Is to Help You noalize llJurt
Sent: Friday, January 28,2011 2:14 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J
Cc: Johnson, John D
Subject: Feb Newsletter Outline
Afternoon- Rough outline for the Feb. Newsletter.
Thanksl
I. Updates:
a. Campbell Co. upcoming vote.
b. Bullitt County Board of Health regulation (scheduled for first reading Feb. 16-see Carol Riker for
language)
c. Smokefree Kentucky (we need to include a link to www.smokefreekentucky.orgto encourage
readers to sign up for information and action alerts-there may be other updates as well)
II. In the news:
a. NY bill to ban e-cigs until FDA action
http://online.wsj.com/artide/APd1e46ddc29014f36b309c6bce46S1 tiS. htm I
6
b. Judge Rules No smoking in Nebraska cigar bars or hotels
III. Voices of Smoke Free Communities
a. Second round of prom os.
IV. Literature Review
a. Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control: A step forward or a
repeat of past mistakes?
i. Zachary Cahn and Michael Siegel
b. Exploring differences in smokers' perceptions of the effectiveness of cessation media messages.
(would rather focus on smoke-free papers---maybe the latest economic study from Wisconsin?)
1. Kevin C Davis, James M Nonnemaker, Matthew C Farrelly, et al.
v. Opposition Watch
a. E-cig (we could explore the 'facts' of this industry and perhaps use the 'American Blue Tip' commercial
and insert the link for members to watch)
VI. Misc.
a. 'Save the date' for Spring Conference
College of Nursing
519 CON Building
859.323.4599
7
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
tobacco_prevention [tobacco_prevention@listserv.ky.gov]
Monday, February 21, 2011 11 :29 AM
tobacco_prevention
tobacco_prevention@listserv.ky.gov
Monday Memo
CESAR FAX 20-06 (Cigarette Use Among 8th, 10th, and 12th Graders).pdf;
FlyerLexington2011.pdf; Spring2011.pdf
March Conference Call
The March conference call will feature an overview of Freedom From Smoking - a group cessation
initiative with an online component from the American Lung Association. The call will be at 9:30 EST,
8:30 CST on Tuesday, March 1, 2011. The call in number is 1-866-889-3903, participant code is
515701#. Prior to the call a presentation will be available on our web site. (It is not there now.)
Make Yours A Fresh Start Family
We still have MYFSF magazines for Mom's and pregnant women. Let me know if we need to restock
your clinic.
###
School Policy Survey - REQUIRED! PLEASE READ
There seems to be some confusion about the 2011 School Policy Survey. Everyone must survey
their schools regardless of any smokefree ordinance passed in the county. A training session was
recently held on TRAIN to provide instruction in conducting the survey and reporting the findings.
That training session has now been archived on TRAIN. This is the archived webcast oftheoriginal
videoconference. To access this webcast, go to the TRAIN home page and find the box entitled
Course 10 and entel"the numberill the title, 1026215.
Link for CV form httos:llapps.chfs.ky.govlcvforml
This is the required training to conduct the 2011 School Policy Survey, which consists of an interview
with the principal (or designee) of each school housing 6
th
grades and above. Everyone needs to train
and conduct the surveys, even if their district has a 100% tobacco-free policy. There are many other
parts to the survey besides the tobacco use policy (enforcement, compliance, tobacco prevention
curricula, youth advocacy, etc., plus some nutrition and physical activity questions). In fact we
encourage everyone to ask the tobacco policy questions as each principal may have a different
perception of policy (and of course some policies are not even written.) Please be sure to mark
yourself complete when you finish the training so that Kathy Begley can send you a password to get
on our website for your school lists, forms, and to enter data online.
There is a new mechanism to enter data, called REDCAP. It takes care of the skip patterns in the
questionnaire and should be pretty efficient! UK CON also added more on follow-up with schools this
year (how to advocate for school policy and how to help schools develop and implement policy). They
hope this will be helpful since so many districts are working on 100% T-F policies this year.
###
1
We received this message from Pat Glass. If you have any information that may assist her, please
respond' directly to her. Her email address is below her name.
I am gathering information and would like input from any school district that has an alternative school
program and also has a "Nicolette gum" procedure or protocol that is used to help the students that
are in the alternative program get thru the day without smoking. Any help would be greatly
appreciated! Thanks.
Pat Glass, R.N.
District School Nurse/Health Services Coord.
Jessamine County Schools
patricia.glass@jessamine.kyschools.us
###
http://travel.usatoday.com/hotels/storv/2011/02/More-hoteIs-go-completely-smoke-
free/43823744/1#uslPageReturn
####
More Employers Saying Smokers Need Not Apply
February 16, 2011
News Summary
An increasing number of hospitals and medical businesses are making tobacco use a reason to reject job applicants or fire existing
employees, The New York Times reported Feb. 10.
Under the new "tobacco-free" hiring policies, applicants can be turned away for smoking, or if they are caught smoking after hire.
Policies differ by company, but some require applicants to take urine tests for nicotine. Health care businesses say they have adopted
the new policies because they want to promote health, cut health care costs, and support healthy choices. Opponents say the poliCies
set a troubling precedent for penalizing employees for engaging in legal behavior.
Dr. Michael Siegel, a professor at the Boston University School of Public Health, said that if the policies become mainstream, there
could be serious consequences. "Unemployment is also bad for health," he said.
It's not certain how many businesses have adopted tobacco-free policies, but the number of examples are growing, and courts in
several states have said the policies are legal. Federal data show that about 20 percent of Americans smoke, and that employees who
smoke cost $3,391 more each year in health care costs and lost productivity than non-smoking employees do.
"We felt it was unfair for employees who maintained healthy lifestyles to have to subsidize those who do not," said Steven C. Bjelich,
CEO of st. Francis Medical Center in Cape Girardeau, Mo., which has stopped hiring smokers. "Essentially that's what happens."
Lewis Maltby, the president of the National Workrights Institute, argued that refusing to hire smokers opened the door for other bans.
"The number of things that we all do privately that have negative impact on our health is endless," Maltby said. "If it's not smoking, it's
beer. If It's not beer, it's chees,!burgers. And what about your sex life?"
Anti-smoking organizations are split on the issue. Several prominent advocacy organizations -- the American Lung Association, the
American Cancer Society and the World Health Organization -- do not hire smokers because of their mission. The American Legacy
Foundation, however, has argued that punishing sniokers is likely to discriminate against low-income and comparatively unskilled
workers. .
"Smokers are not the enemy," said the organization's chief counsel, Ellen Vargyas. "We want to be very supportive of smokers, and the
best thing we can do is help them quit, not condition employment on whether they quit."
2
Mandy Carroll, a nursing student at the University of Kansas, opposed the new policies as discriminatory. She smokes a pack a day,
even though she understands the potential health consequences.
"Obviously we khow the effects of smoking, we see it every day in the hospital," she said. "It's a stupid choice, but it's a personal
choice."
Studies: E-Cigarettes Popular, May Be Effective at Helping Smokers Quit
February 15, 2011
Research Summary
A new research study from Boston University suggests that electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) may be more effective at helping
smokers quit than nicotine patches or gum, TIME magazine reported Feb. 10.
The researchers, led by Michael Siegel, M.D., sent surveys to 5,000 first-time buyers of e-cigarettes over two weeks in 2009. The
response rate was low (4.5 percent), or 222, according to a summary published by the Boston University School of Public
Health. Respondents were primarily older males who had tried to quit smoking many times in the past.
Nearly 67 percent of the respondents reported that they had cut down on cigarettes six months after beginning use of e-cigarettes, and
34.3 percent said they were not using e-cigarettes or other cessation aids that contained nicotine. Other research has shown that
around 12 to 18 percent of people who used nicotine patches and nicotine gum report abstinence at six months -- nearly half the rate of
those who used e-cigarettes in this survey.
"This study suggests that electronic cigarettes are helping thousands of ex-smokers remain off cigarettes," Siegel said.
The authors of the study acknowledged that the study's conclusions were limited by the low response rate, pointing out that smokers
who had quit or cut down on smoking might be more likely to respond. However, they said it was the best evidence to date on the
effectiveness of e-cigarettes, and that the devices "hold promise as a smoking-cessation method and that they are worthy of further
study using more rigorous research designs."
TIME said that at least one earlier study had concluded that e-cigarettes were ineffective at helping smokers quit. Several states are
considering prohibiting their use.
"Banning this product would invariably result in many ex-smokers returning to cigarette smoking," Siegel said. "Removing electronic
cigarettes from the market would substantially harm the public's health."
Meanwhile, a second study of e-cigarettes from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health reviewed internet searches for
smoking alternatives between January 2008 and September 2010 and found that e-cigarettes had become far more popular than other
options, at least in the United States and the U.K.
"Neither of these two studies provides scientific evidence that e-cigarettes are effective in helping people to quit," said professor John
Pierce of the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego. "It's not clear to me that e-cigarettes aren't harmful in
some way. It's not clear to the FDA, either."
Both studies appeared online Feb. 8, 2011 in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. The Boston University study, led by Michael
B. Siegel, was titled, "Electronic Cigarettes As a Smoking-Cessation Tool: Results from an Online Survey"
(PDF). The study on the popularity of e-cigarettes conducted by John W. Ayers and his team, was titled, "Tracking the Rise in
Popularity of Electronic Nicotine Deliverv Systems ('Electronic Cigarettes') Using Search Querv
Surveillance" (PDF).
This article summarizes an external report or press release on research published in a scientific journal. When available, links to the
sources are provided above.
Senators: Ban smokeless tobacco use in MLB
3
From: MSNBC
Date: 02/15/11 2:30pm EST
NBC's Ken Strickland Reports:
Two Democratic senators are asking baseball commissioner Bud Selig to ban all tobacco use in the
sport, specifically citing smokeless products.
Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey are suggesting that Selig push for a
ban as part of the negotiations in the players' collective bargaining agreement later this year.
Major League Baseball banned tobacco use in its minor leagues in 1993, but still allows it in the big
leagues. The senators say Major League Baseball "is undoubtedly complicit" in the increase its use
with school-aged boys.
In a letter to Selig, Durbin and Lautenberg wrote, "We now know conclusively that smokeless tobacco
endangers the health of baseball players who use it, but it also affects millions of young people who
watch baseball."
"The use of smokeless tobacco by baseball players undermines the positive image of the sport and
sends a dangerous message to young fans, who may be influenced by the players they look up to as
role models," they wrote
The senators say they were motivated to write the letter because of an recent newspaper article
written by Washington Nationals pitcher Steven Strasburg. The pitcher said his initial use chewing
tobacco stemmed from a desire to emulate pro baseball players.
Referencing a National Youth Risk Behavior Survey, the senators say the use of smokeless tobacco
products has increased 36% among high school boys since 2003, raising its use among all boys to
15%.
"While tobacco companies spend millions on ads tailored to attract young people to use tobacco
products, MLB is undoubtedly complicit in attracting many young people to try smokeless tobacco
after seeing their baseball heroes chew tobacco," they wrote.
4
February 14, 2011
Vol. 20, Issue 6
University of Maryland, College Park
Current Cigarette Use Continues to Decrease Among U.S. 12th Graders;
Decrease in Use Among 8
th
and 1 (JIh Grade Students May Have Stalled
Current cigarette use among high school seniors continues to decrease, according to data from the
2010 Monitoring the Future study. In 2010,19% of 12th grade students reported smoking cigarettes
in the past 30 days, down from the most recent peak of37% in 1997. Cnrrent prevalence rates of
cigarette use among 8
th
(7 %) and 10
th
(14 %) graders are also far below their peak rates.' However,
smoking rates among these younger students appear to have leveled off in recent years, suggesting
that the decrease that began in 1997 may have stalled (see figure below). The authors note that while
these long-term decreases in smoking are encouraging, "there are still significant proportions ofteens
putting themselves at risk for a host of serious diseases and premature death because they are taking
up cigarette smoking" (p. 2).
50%
Percentage of U.S. 8
th
, 10
th
, and 12th Grade Students
Reporting Cigarette Use in the Past 30 Days, 1975 to 2010
.......... ,,, ..... ,, .................. ,, .. ,,., ................................. ,.,,, ... ,,,., .......................... ,, ................ ,,,, ................ " .......................................... " .. " .... "",,.
40% ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..
30% ..................................................... - .. ;::.::;;;:::::J
. .... 12th Graders
10th Graders
10% ................................................................................................................................................................... . ...... .................................. .
8th Graders
SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from University of Michigan, "Smoking Stops Declining and Shows Signs ofIncreasing
Among Y o n n g e ~ Teens," Press Release, 12/14/2010. Available online at
http://www.monitoringthefuture.org/data/l0data.html#20 1 Odala-cigs .
.. 301-405-9770 (voice)" 301-403-8342 (fax)' CESAR@cesar.nmd.edn" www.cesar.umd.edu
CESAR FAX may be copied without permission. Please cite CESAR as the source.
T AMERlCAN UJNG ASSOCIATION"
Ik: _ - 'i
/-; ~ u ? l " ' " A ~
Freedom From Smoking
Facilitator Training
One and a half day workshop
Wednesday, May 4th- gam - 4pm
& Thursday, May 5th- gam -12:15pm
Training location:
Fairfield Inn and Suites by Marriott Lexington North
2100 Hackney Place
Lexington, KY 40511
Register online: www.MidlandLung.org
Select 'Learning Opportunities' then 'Facilitator Trainings'
For More Information Contact Jennifer Hollifield at
502/363-2652 or Jenniferh@kylung.org
Space is limited, Registration Deadline: April 22, 2011
ALA reserves the right to cancel training should minimum number of registrants not be met
Registration: $250*
Includes FFS Facilitator Guide, certificate of course completion,
continental breakfast both days and lunch on day one
*This is an introductory rate that will go up to $350 for trainings after July 1, 2011
About Freedom From Smoking
Freedom From Smoking is a Comprehensive smoking cessation program designed to offer the group sup-
port and encouragement many need to quit smoking for good. FFS is an 8 session program, and uses an
addiction-based. model to help smokers understand their addiction and ways to break the habit. Participants
are encouraged to use Nicotine Replacement Therapies and other medications as a component of the pro-
gram.
TAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION ..
-- f AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION.
it -- -.:- '"l"t'V7
---_._------_. --------
F ROMS!!''! N G'"
- - --- --=--- --------- -=----- --::- =- - - -- -- - -, -,
. .
Freedom From Smoking
Facilitator Trainings
One and a half day workshops
Upcoming Dates and locations for Spring
March 3- 4,2011
Covington, KY
Hampton Inn Cincinnati-
Riverfront
March 31- April 1, 2011
Nashville, TN
Metro Center
Space is limited
May 4-5,2011
Lexington, KY
Fairfield Inn and Suites
by Marriott Lexington
North
ALA reserves the right to cancel training should minimum number of registrants not be met
Register online: www.Midlandlung.org
Select 'Learning Opportunities' then 'Facilitator Trainings'
For More Information Contact Jennifer Hollifield at
502/363-2652 or Jenniferh@kylung.org
Registration: $250*
Includes FFS Facilitator Guide, certificate of course completion,
continental breakfast both days and lunch on day one
*This is an introductory rate that will go up to $350 for trainings after July 1, 2011
About Freedom From Smoking
Freedom From Smoking is a Comprehensive smoking cessation program designed to offer the group sup-
port and encouragement many need to quit smoking for good. FFS is an 8 session program, and uses an
addiction-based model to help smokers understand their addiction and ways to break the habit. Participants
are encouraged to use Nicotine Replacement Therapies and other medications as a component of the pro-
gram.
TAMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION ..
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Monday, February 21, 2011 8:27 AM
Hahn, Ellen J
Subject: RE: newsletter ready for your review
Better than last time, not perfect, but better. Still a bit optimistic about some issues (like e-cigs) in my read of the
newsletter.
E. Kercsmar, PhD
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
From: Hahn, Ellen J
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 7:45 AM
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: RE: newsletter ready for your review
Thanks. How is it?
751 Rose Street
859-257-2358
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
I!$p
,. --.
Find kysmokeJree on
and
1
COLLEGE OF NURSING
Ot! r -Gt>il! to You
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 9:02 PM
To: Hahn, Ellen J .
Cc: Marijanovic, Nina; Johnson, John D
Subject: newsletter ready for your review
Ellen,
I've taken a 1
st
pass-thru of the newsletter. It's ready for your review.
Thanks,
Sarah
College of Nursing, 751 Rose Street,450B, Lexington, KY 40536-0232
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
scave2@email.ukv.edu
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Find kysmokejree on Twitter and Facebook !
2
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Hi all,
Riker, Carol A
Saturday, February 19, 20111:10 PM
Johnson, John 0; Hahn, Ellen J; Kercsmar, Sarah; Mundy, Monica E
Fallin, Amanda T; Ricks, Janelle; Wagner, Kristian K
RE: Google Alert - bullit! county smoking
tobcont KCSP Bullitt County Smoke Free regulation 2-11.doc; tobcont KCSP Bullitt fact sheet
2010.pdf
Lots of red flags for Bullitt from these google alerts; thanks John! I'll send Swannie info about posting signs
"conspicuously in the building" because of the meeting date change. Although it's not completely clear from
communication from him, it looks like they did do a first reading and have changed second reading to March 15
th

(Swannie had said something about putting "it" off til March, but maybe he meant 2
nd
reading)
FYI Hagedorn's C-J article on the public opinion poll states that the poll "found that the percentage
of respondents opposed to a ban - 22 percent - matched the proportion ofl"espondents who
smoke." However, Bullitt's unweighted 3-year pooled estimate from BRFSS 2006-8 is 24.
Re the regulation itself, as I'm reading through it I can see numerous glitchy things that TCLC may have noted (since we
never saw the review). For example, it's unclear whether nursing homes are covered or just the common areas. All
enclosed areas of places of employment are covered, including medical facilities, but medical facilities are not defined.
The "Health care facilities" definition includes nursing homes, yet nursing homes are mentioned in the statement about
"common areas." Sports arena language is confusing in various areas of the regulation, too. However, most of these
things are exactly the same as the Clark Co regulation, and I'm pretty sure they weren't noted in the suggested updates
to Clark Co. It would really take a lawyer to straighten them out properly. We really need a model regulation.
"Lobbies, hallways, and other common areas in apartment buildings ... " is the only reference I see to apartments
(see highlight in blog, below, implying that Bullitt would love to regulate private residences). So perhaps they
need to try and clear up this purposeful misinterpretation. (Never sure how much attention to give to opposition
statements; I'd like to get on the phone with Swannie and Cynthia and see if they're monitoring the blogs and
what they're hearing.) It looks like Bullitt Co Choice is fonning a "legal team" so we're probably in for more
fun and games.
One clear problem is the effective date of the regulation, November 15, 2011! I wish I had picked that up when
I skimmed the regulation before! Would that be a substantive change if it's going to second reading?? Waiting
that long is just asking for the opposition to start trouble before implementation when people LOVE these
policies once they experience them (nevennind starting such a policy in wintertime).
Thanks in advance for any advice. I'll go ahead and email Swannie and Cynthia re posting signs for changed
date on BOH meeting and the concern about the effective date and see if we can talk sometime on Monday or
Tuesday.
Carol
If you want to see a few quotes that popped out at me without opening all the links, read on.
From Emily Hagedorn's Neighborhoods online which quotes from Bullitt Co Choice (more to come in "Neighborhoods"
this Wed apparently):
1
The board has rescheduled the original May 17 smoking ban vole for an earlier special meeting in March. The Health
Department director persistently pushed for the advance of the voting date, with the purpose being to prevent, in his words,
"the headache': of board members receiving phone calls about the issue from the public during the three months before the
originally scheduled vote.
Included in the ban are bars, private clubs, and even "e-cigarettes" which emit only water vapor, with no demonstrated adverse
affects to second-hand individuals. "The inclusion of e-cigarettes only fwthers our conclusion that this Isn" about
environmental safety, but rather it is an attack on a legal individual behavior that one group doesn't approve of In another,"
Compton said, "If they thought theycould get away with a smoking banlt in private residences, Ihave no doubt that would
happen as well. The woidingpffhH
More from SuI/itt Co Choice about forming a "legal team":
Some members of the coalition have resigned to wait for their day in court, placing their trust in the group's newly
commissioned legal team. Others, such as Karen Johnson, another county business owner, Hillview City
Councilwoman, and Bullitt County Choice spokesperson express their disdain vocally. "I just want them to go
away and leave me alone; let me run my business and live my life. Where or when will this end? How far is too
far?" Johnson asked during the group's meeting. Still, the members of Bullitt County Choice remain optimistic that
the legal system they accuse the Health Department of circumventing will prevail.
Bullitt County Choice is a local government watchdog organization whose membership includes county business
owners and residents, most of which are non-smokers. The group officially formed in August 2010 after the Health
Department smoking ban was introduced. Bullitt County Choice is not exclusively focused on smoking. Its mission
is to speak out against local government encroachment, corruption, and waste. Their website is
http://www.bullittcountvchoice.com/
The article on the public opinion poll by Hagedorn was good. I read through the comments and most are typical and
poorly written, including another rant about health agencies trying to pad their resumes and budgets. MANY comments
from Bullitt Choice. One comment from a pediatric nurse that made good points, but mostly about kids, obviously, and
also had spelling errors (arghhh!). Here's a sampling of some of the comments that were fairly well-written:
Does anyone have any figures on how the smoking ban in Jefferson county have affected bars and restaurants. I play
trivia once a week. Back when there were smoking sections the restaurant put trivia in the smoking section and those of
us who do not smoke hated it. Onr cloths reeked. We seliously thought of quitting. Some players did quit. When
smoking areas were banned none of the smokers quit playing. They just go outside to smoke. It is so much more
pleasant. More people than ever play now. It's great business for the restaurant. Name withheld
I generally oppose blanket bans (it is silly to not exclude bars after lOpm - nobody is there at that point for their own
health), but if they are going to happen, the local level is the place for it to be decided. Now revise the plan slightly and
pass this using an elected body and I don \ have any problems with it.
For the people that responded to my post. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! Not only did I offend smokers I
offended the drunks too!
What kind of education do you have? Taking kids to bars ... Come 011 now! The places I am talking about are the area
restaurants and family orientated places. Why should I have to avoid places too? It is my right to be able to enjoy my
community without somebody blowing tobacco smoke at me. Get educated about what smoking does to other people
not only yourself. Let's face it you don \ here people telling the people that dip to stop doing it in public, do you know
why? Because they are not blowing cancer causing smoke at us. They are only exposing tllemse1vs to dangerous
chemicals not me!
An interchange re polling;
Re comment "lin glad Emily mentioned the $7,000 price tag for the oh-so-independent polling company":
You're implying that the polling company shonid work for free? Or perform the sUlvey on its own volition?
I'm "implying" that surveys are worthless. Do you think an organization is going to pay for a survey that
doesn\ agree with their pre-supposed findings?
2
And furthermore, how do sUlveys have any real bealing in a Republic? Now we Ie back to three wolves and a
sheep taking a poll on what to have for dinner. (From Bullitt Co Choice)
From: Google Alerts [mailto:googlealerts-noreply@google.com]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 201111:43 AM
To: Johnson, John D
Subject: Google Alert - bullitt county smoking
News 1 new result for bullit! county smoking
Smoldng ban debate lights up
Louisville ConIier-Journal (blog)
The Bullitt Couuty Board of Health heard the first reading of au ordinance this week that would ban smoking in all
public places. Bnt before it did that, it released a survey it couuuissioned ou the public opinion of a smoking bau ....
See all stories on this topic
D
Louisville CO!!fier-
Journal (blog)
Web 3 new results for bullitt county smoking
County business owners decry health board's circumvention of ...
The group officially formed in August 2010 after the Health Department smoking ban was introduced. Bullitt County Choice is not
exclusively focused on ...
www.bullittcountychoice.com/ .. .lboard of healdl circumvent...
Bullitt County Smoke-Free Ordinance
THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE BY REGULATING SMOKlNG IN PUBLIC PLACES AND PLACES OF
EMPLOYMENT Section 1. Findings and Intent: The Bullitt County Board of ...
www.scdbd.com/doc/ ... lBullitt-County-Smoke-Free-Ordinance
Survey: 75 percent of Bullitt Countians favor smoking ban
From Louisville (KY) Couder-Journal (2011-02-14):A survey done for the Bullitt County Health Department has found broad
support for a smolting bau in ... .
5Z'lli .hun!
Tip: Use quotes ("like this") around a set of words in your query to match them exactly. Learn more.
Remove this alert.
Manage your alerts.
3
BULLITT COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH
REGULATION NO. 10-01
A REGULATION RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND
WELFARE BY REGULATING SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES AND PLACES OF
EMPLOYMENT
Section 1. Findings and Intent:
The Bullitt County Board of Health does hereby find that:
The 2006 U.S. Surgeon General's Report, The Health Consequences of Involuntary
Exposure to Tobacco Smoke, has concluded that: (1) secondhand smoke exposure causes disease
and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke; (2) children exposed to
secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), acute
respiratory problems, ear infections, and asthma attacks, and that smoking by parents causes
respiratory symptoms and slows hmg growth in their children; (3) exposure of adults to
secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and causes
coronary heart disease and lung cancer; (4) there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand
smoke; (5) establishing smoke-free workplaces is the only effective way to ensure that
secondhand smoke exposure does not occur in the workplace, because ventilation and other air
cleaning technologies cannot . completely control for exposure of nonsmokers to secondhand
smoke; and (6) evidence from peer-reviewed studies shows that smoke-free policies and laws do
not have an adverse economic impact on the hospitality industry. (U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A
Report of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health
Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2006.)
Numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to iudoor air
pollution, and that breathing secondhand smoke (also known as enviromnental tobacco smoke) is
a cause of disease in healthy nonsmokers, including heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease, and
lung cancer. The National Cancer Institute detennined in 1999 that secondhand smoke is
responsible for the early deaths of approximately 53,000 Americans annually. (National Cancer
Institute (NCl), "Health effects of exposure to enviromnental tobacco smoke: the report of the
California Enviromnental Protection Agency. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph 10,"
Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute (NCI), August 1999.)
The Public Health Service's National Toxicology Program (NTP) has listed secondhand
smoke as a known carcinogen. (Euvironmental Health Infonnation Service (EHIS),
"Enviromnental tobacco smoke: first listed in the' Ninth Report on Carcinogens," u.s.
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Public Health Service, NTP, 2000;
reaffinned by the NTP in subsequent reports on carcinogens, 2003, 2005.)
Based on a finding by the California Environmental Protection Agency in 2005, the
California Air Resources Board has detennined that secondhand smoke is a toxic air
contaminant, finding that exposure to secondhand smoke has serious health effects, including
1 of 11
low birth-weight babies; sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS); increased respiratory infections
in children; asthma in children and adults; lung cancer, sinus cancer, and breast cancer in
younger, premenopausal women; heart disease; and death. (Appendix II Findings of the
Scientific Review Panel: Findings of the Scientific Review Panel on Proposed Identification of
Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant as adopted at the Panel's June 24,
2005 Meeting," California Air Resources Board (ARB), September 12,2005.)
Scientific evidence has firmly established that there is no safe level of exposure to
secondhand tobacco smoke, a pollutant that causes serious illness in adults and children. There is
also indisputable evidence that implementing 100% smoke-free environments is the only
effective way to protect the population from the harmful effects of exposure to secondhand
smoke. (World Health Organization (WHO), "Protection from exposure to secondhand smoke:
policy recommendations," World Health Organization (WHO), 2007.)
A study of hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction in Helena, Montana
before, during, and after a local law eliminating smoking in workplaces and public places was in
effect, has determined that laws to enforce smoke-free workplaces and public places may be
associated with a reduction in morbidity from heart disease. (Sargent, Richard P.; Shepard,
Robert M.; Glantz, Stanton A., "Reduced incidence of admissions for myocardial infarction
associated with public smoking ban: before and after study," British Medical Journal 328: 977-
980, April 24, 2004.) Similar studies have been conducted in Bowling Green, Ohio; Monroe
County, Indiana; Pueblo, Colorado; New York State; France; Greece; Italy; and Scotland. All of
these studies have reached the conclusion that communities see an immediate reduction in heart
attack admissions after the implementation of comprehensive smoke-free laws. (In.a.],
"Bibliography of Secondhand Smoke Studies." American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation,
February 26, 2008.)
Secondhand smoke is particularly hazardous to elderly people, individuals with
cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics
and those with obstructive airway disease. (California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal
EPA), "Health effects of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke", Tobacco Control 6(4): 346-
353, Winter, 1997.) The Americans With Disabilities Act, which requires that disabled persons
have access to public places and workplaces, deems impaired respiratory function to be a
disability. (Daynard, RA., "Environmental tobacco smoke and the Americans with Disabilities
Act," Nonsmokers' Voice 15(1): 8-9.)
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has determined that the risk of acute
myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease associated with exposure to tobacco smoke is
non-linear at low doses, increasing rapidly with relatively small doses such as those received
from secondhand smoke or actively smoking one or two cigarettes a day, and has warned that all
patients at increased risk of coronary heart disease or with known coronary artery disease should
avoid all indoor environments that permit smoking. (Pechacek, Terry F.; Babb, Stephen,
"CommentalY: How acute and reversible are the cardiovascular risks of secondhand smoke?"
British Medical Journal 328: 980-983, April 24, 2004.)
Given the fact that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke, the American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) bases its
20f11
ventilation standards on totally smoke-free environments. ASHRAE has detelmined that there is
currently no air filtration or other ventilation technology that can completely eliminate all the
carcinogenic components in secondhand smoke and the health risks caused by secondhand
smoke exposure, and recommends that indoor environments be smoke-free in their entirety.
(Samet, J.; Bohanon, Jr., H.R.; Coultas, D.B.; Houston, T.P.; Persily, A.K.; Schoen, LJ.;
Spengler, J.; Callaway, C.A., "ASHRAE position document on environmental tobacco smoke,"
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), 2005.)
A significant amount of secondhand smoke exposure occurs in the workplace. Employees
who work in smoke-filled businesses suffer a 25-50% higher risk of heart attack and higher rates
of death from cardiovascular disease and cancer, as well as increased acute respiratory disease
and measurable decrease in lung function. (Pitsavos, C.; Panagiotakos, D.B.; Chrysohoou, C.;
Skoumas, J.; Tzioumis, K.; Stefanadis, C.; Toutonzas, P., "Association between exposure to
environmental tobacco smoke and the development of acute coronary syndromes: the
CARDI02000 case-control study," Tobacco Controlll (3),' 220-225, September 2002.)
During periods of active smoking, peak and average outdoor tobacco smoke COTS) levels
measured in outdoor cafes and restaurant and bar patios near smoker's rival indoor tobacco
smoke concentrations. (Klepeis, N.; Ott, W.R.; Switzer, P., "Real-time measurement of outdoor
tobacco smoke particles," Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 57;' 522-534,
2007.)
The Society of Actuaries has detennined that secondhand smoke costs the U.S. economy
roughly $10 billion a year: $5 billion in estimated medical costs associated with secondhand
smoke exposure; and $4.6 billion in lost productivity. (Behan, D.F.; Eriksen, M.P.; Lin, Y.,
"Economic Effects of Environmental Tobacco Smoke," Society of Actuaries, March 31, 2005.)
Numerous economic analyses examining restaurant and hotel receipts and controlling for
economic variables have shown either no difference or a positive economic impact after
enactment of laws requiring workplaces to be smoke-free. Creation of smoke-free workplaces is
sound economic policy and provides the maximnm level of employee health and safety. (Glantz,
S.A. & Smith, L. The effect of ordinances requiring smoke-free restaurants on restaurant sales in
the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 87:1687-1693, 1997; Colman, R.;
Urbonas, C.M., "The economic impact of smoke-free workplaces: an assessment for Nova
Scotia, prepared for Tobacco Control Unit, Nova Scotia Department of Health," GPI Atlantic,
September 2001.)
Hundreds of communities in the U.S., plus numerous states, including California,
Delaware; Florida, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New York, and Washington, have
enacted laws requiring workplaces, restaurants, bars, and other public places to be smoke-free, as
have numerous countries, including Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, Scotland, Sweden, Uganda,
and Uruguay.
There is no legal or constitutional "right to smoke." Business owners have no legal or
constitutional right to expose their employees and customers to the toxic chemicals in
secondhand smoke. On the contrary, employers have a common law duty to provide their
workers with a workplace that is not unreasonably dangerous.
3 of 11
Smoking is a potential cause of fires; cigarette and cigar bums and ash stains on
merchandise and fixtures causes economic damage to businesses. ("The high price of cigarette
smoking," Business & Health 15(8), SupplementA: 6-9, August 1997.)
The smoking of tobacco is a form of air pollution, a positive danger to health, and a
material public nuisance.
Accordingly, the Bullitt Couuty Board of Health finds and declares that the purposes of
this regulation are: (1) to protect the public health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in public
places and places of employment; and (2) to guarantee the right of nonsmokers to breathe
smoke-free air, and to recognize that the need to breathe smoke-free air shall have priority over
the desire to smoke.
Section 2. DefInitions:
The following words and phrases, whenever used in this Regulation, shall be construed as
defined in this Section:
A. "Bar" means an establishment that is devoted to the serving of alcoholic
beverages for consumption by guests on the premises and in which the serving of food is only
incidental to the consumption of those beverages, including but not limited to, taverns,
nightclubs, cocktail lounges, and cabarets.
B. "Business" means a sole proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, corporation, or
other business entity, either for-profit or not-for-profit, including, but not limited to, retail
establishments where goods or services are sold; professional corporations and other entities
where legal, medical, dental, engineering, architectural, or other professional services are
delivered; and private clubs.
C. "Employee" means is a person who is employed by an employer in consideration
for direct or indirect monetary wages or profit, and a person who volunteers his or her services to
an employer.
D. "E-cigarette" means any electronic oral device, such as one composed of a
heating element, battery, and/or electronic circuit, which provides a vapor of nicotine or any
other substances, and the use or inhalation of which simulates smoking. The term shall include
any such device, whether manufactured, distributed, marketed, or sold an e-cigarette, e-cigar, e-
pipe, or under any other product name or descriptor.
E. "Employer" means a person, business, partnership, association, corporation,
including a municipal corporation, trust, or non-profit entity that employs the services of one or
more individual persons.
F. "Enclosed Area" means all space between a floor and a ceiling that is bordered
thirty (30) percent or more by doors, walls, or windows, whether open or closed, the combination
of which extend from the floor to the ceiling. A wall includes any physical barrier, whether
temporary or permanent, solid or permeable.
4 of 11
G. "Health Care Facility" means an office or institution providing care or treatment
of diseases, whether physical, mental, or emotional, or other medical, physiological, or
psychological conditions, including but not limited to, hospitals, rehabilitation hospitals or other
clinics, including weight control clinics, nursing homes, homes for the aging or chronically ill,
laboratories, and offices of surgeons, chiropractors, physical therapists, physicians, dentists, and
all specialists within these professions. This definition shall include all waiting rooms, hallways,
private rooms, semiprivate rooms, and wards within health care facilities.
H. "Place of Employment" means an area under the control of a public or private
employer that employees frequent during the course of employment, including, but not limited
to, work areas, private offices, employee lounges, restrooms, conference rooms, meeting rooms,
classrooms, employee cafeterias, hallways, and vehicles. A private residence is not a "place of
employment" unless it is used as a licensed child care, adult day care, or health care facility.
I. "Public Place" means an area to which the public is invited or in which the public
is permitted, including, but not limited to, banks, bars, educational facilities, whether public or
private, health care facilities, hotel and motel lobbies, laundromats, polling places, public
transportation vehicles and facilities, reception areas, restaurants, retail food production and
marketing establishments, retail service establishments, retail stores, shopping malls, sports
arenas, theaters and waiting rooms. A private residence is not a "public place" unless it is used
as a childcare, adult day care, or health care facility.
J. "Restaurant" means an eating establishment, including but not limited tei, coffee
shops, cafeterias, sandwich stands, and private and public school cafeterias, which gives or offers
for sale food to the public, guests, or employees, as well as kitchens and catering facilities in
which food is prepared on the premises for serving elsewhere. The term "restaurant" shall
include a bar area within the restaurant.
K. "Retail Tobacco Store" means a retail store utilized primarily for the sale of
tobacco, tobacco products and accessories and in which the sale of other products is merely
incidental.
L. "Service Line" means an indoor or outdoor line in which one (1) or more persons
are waiting for or receiving service of any ldnd, whether or not the service involves the exchange
of money.
M. "Shopping Mall or Flea Markets" means an enclosed public walkway or hall area
that serves to connect retail, professional establishments or booths.
N. "Smoking" means inhaling, exhaling, burning or carrying any lighted or heated
cigar, cigarette, pipe, or other lighted or heated tobacco or plant product intended for inhalation,
in any manner or in any form. "Smoking" also includes the use of an e-cigarette which creates a
vapor, in any manner or in any form, or the use of any oral smoking device for the purpose of
circumventing the prohibition of smoking in this regulation.
o. "Sports Arena" means sports pavilions, stadiums, gymnasiums, health spas,
boxing arenas, swimming pools, roller and ice rinks, bowling alleys, and other similar places
5 of 11
where members of the general public assemble to engage in physical exercise, participate in
athletic competition, or witness sports or other events.
Section 3. Application of Regulation to City-owned and County-owned Enclosed Public
Places or Enclosed Places of Employment:
All enclosed public places or enclosed places of employment owned or operated by the
City of Shephersdville, City of MT Washington, City of Hillview, City of Pioneer Village, City
of Lebanon Junction, City of Hebron Estates, City of Hunters Hollow or any other cities or towns
withinn Bullitt County, including all incorporated or unincorporated areas of Bullitt County.
Section 4. Prohibition of Smoking in Enclosed Public Places:
Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed public places within Bullitt County,
including, but not limited to, the following places:
A. Areas available to and customarily used by the general public in businesses
patronized by the public, including, but not limited to, banks, laundromats, professional offices,
galleries, libraries, museums, and retail service establishments.
B. Bars.
C. Bingo facilities.
D. Child care and adult day care facilities.
E. Convention fucilities.
F. Health care facilities.
G. Hotels and motels.
H. Lobbies, hallways, and other common areas in apartment buildings,
condominiums, trailer parks, retirement facilities, nursing homes, and other multiple-unit
residential facilities.
I. Private clubs when being used for a function to which the general public is
invited.
J. Restaurants.
K. Retail stores.
L. Service lines.
M. Sports arenas, including enclosed places in outdoor arenas.
N. Theaters and other facilities primarily used for exhibiting motion pictures, stage
dramas, lectures, musical recitals, or other similar pelformances.
60f11
Section 5. Prohibition of Smoldng in Enclosed Places of Employment:
Smoking shall be prohibited in all enclosed areas of places of employment. This shall
include, but is not limited to, common work areas, auditoriums, classrooms, conference and
meeting rooms, private offices, elevators, hallways, medical facilities, cafeterias, lounges, stairS,
and restrooms.
Section 6. Prohibition of Smoking in Certain Outdoor Public Places and Certain Outdoor
Places of Employment:
Smoking shall be prohibited in the following outdoor public places and outdoor places of
employment:
A. Service lines.
B. Sports arenas, including within a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet within
bleachers, grandstands or other seating areas for use by spectators at sporting and other public
events.
C. Within a reasonable distance from the outside entrance to or operable windows of
any area in which smoking is prohibited by this Regulation and from the air intake of a
ventilation system serving an enclosed area where smoking is prohibited, in order to ensure
tobacco smoke does not enter that enclosed area through entrances, windows, ventilation systems
or other means.
Section 7. Where Smoldng is Not Regulated:
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Regulation to the contrary, the following
areas shall be exempt from the provisions of Sections 4,5 and 6:
A. Private residences, except when a business is open to the public.
B. Hotel and motel rooms that are rented to guests and are designated as smoking
rooms; provided, however, that not more than ten percent (10%) of rooms rented to guests in a
hotel or motel may be so designated. All smoking rooms on the same floor must be contiguous.
Smoke from the designated smoking rooms shall not infiltrate into areas where smoking is
prohibited under the provisions of this Regulation, which is the entirety of the remainder of the
hotel/motel. The status of rooms as smoking or nonsmoking may not be changed, except to add
additional nonsmoking rooms.
C. Outdoor areas of places of employment, except those covered by the provisions of
Section 6.
Section 8. Declaration of Establishment as Nonsmoldng:
Nothing in this regulation may be construed as preventing an owner, operator, manager
or other authorized person in control of any establishment, facility or outdoor area from
declaring the entire campus or property associated with that establishment, facility or outdoor
70fll
area smoke-free. Enforcement of any such restrictions exceeding the scope of this regulation
would be the responsibility of the authorized person in control of the affected establishment,
facility or outdoor area.
Section 9. Posting of Signs:
The owner, operator, manager or other person in control of the premises shall be
responsible for the placement of signage and the removal of ashtrays required by this Section.
A. "No Smoking" signs or the international "No Smoking" symbol (consisting of a
pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle with a red bar across it)
shall be clearly and conspicuously posted in every public place and place of employment where
smoking is prohibited by this Regulation.
B. A conspicuous sign clearly stating that smoking is prohibited shall be posted at
each entrance utilized by the public entering and exiting public places within which smoking is
prohibited by this Regulation. A conspicuous sign clearly stating that smoking is prohibited shall
be posted at each entrance utilized by employees entering and exiting places of employment
within which smoking is prohibited by this Regulation.
C. All ashtrays shall be removed from any area within which this Regulation or the
owner, operator, manager, or other person having control of the area prohibits smoking, except
for ashtrays displayed for sale and not for use on the premises.
Section 10. Non-retaliation and Non-waiver of Rights:
A. No person or employer shall discharge, refuse to hire, or in any manner retaliate
against an employee, applicant for employment, or customer because that employee, applicant,
or customer exercises any rights afforded by this Regulation or reports or attempts to prosecute a
violation ofthis Regulation.
B. An employee who continues to work in a setting where an employer allows
smoking in violation of this Regulation does not waive or otherwise surrender any legal rights
the employee may have against the employer or any other party.
Section 11. Enforcement:
A. Enforcement of this Regulation shall be by citation and will be the responsibility
of the staff of the Bullitt County Health Department as designated by the Public Health Director.
Enforcement may be conducted by any and all sworn law officers who work within Bullitt
County. Enforcement shall be primarily done on a complaint basis but can be done at any time a
violation is witnessed by an enforcement official.
B. Notice of the provisions of this Regulation shall be given to all applicants for a
business license in Bullitt County by the appropriate clerk.
C. Any citizen who desires to register a complaint under this Regulation may initiate
enforcement with any of the authorized persons listed above.
8 of II
D. The Health Department, while in an establishment perfonning otherwise legal
inspections, shall inspect for compliance with this Regulation.
E. If an owner, manager, operator, or employee of an establishment subject to this
Regulation observes a person violating the Regulation, he or she shall immediately direct the
person in violation to stop smoking. If the person violating the Regulation does not stop
smoking, the owner, manager, operator, or employee shall ask the person to leave the premises.
If the person in violation refuses to leave, the owner, manager, operator, or employee shall call
local law enforcement.
In no event is an owner or agent of the premises to forcibly remove the person violating
the Regulation. Compliance is achieved under the subsection if the owner or agent of the
premises follows these steps.
F. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Regulation, the Bullitt County Health
Department, an employee, or any person aggrieved by a failure to comply with this Regulation,
whether by commission or omission, including violations on the part of an owner, operator,
manager, employee or other person(s) in control of a public place or a place of employment
covered by this Regulation, may bring legal action to enforce this Regulation, either by civil
action seeking injunctive relief or by criminal complaint in a court of competent jurisdiction.
Section 12. Violations and Penalties:
A. A person who smokes in an area where smoking is prohibited by the provisions of
this Regulation shall be guilty of a violation, punishable by a fine of fifty dollars ($50.00).
B. A person who owns, manages, operates, or otherwise controls a public place or
place of employment and who fails to comply with the provisions of this Regulation shall be
guilty of a violation, punishable by:
1. A fine of one hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation.
2. A fine of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) for a second violation
within one (1) year from a previous offense date.
3. A fine of five hundred dollars ($500.00) for a third violation and each
additional violation within one year from a previous offense date.
C. In addition to the fines established by this Section, violations of this Regulation
by a person who owns, manages, operates, or othelwise controls a public place or place of
employment may serve as reasonable cause for the suspension or revocation of any permit or
license issued to the person for the premises on which the violation occurred.
D. Violation of this Regulation is declared to be a public nuisance, which may be
abated by the Board of Health or its designated agents by restraining order, preliminary and
permanent injunction, or other means provided for by law. The Board of Health may recover the
reasonable costs of any court enforcement action seeking abatement of this nuisance.
9 of 11
E. Each day on which a violation of this Regulation occurs shall be considered a
separate and distinct violation. Multiple violations witnessed in a single observance shall also be
considered separate and distinct violations.
Section 13. Enforcement Board:
Any person or entity cited under this Regulation may appeal said citation and request a
hearing before the Board of Health, save for criminal charges, which must be adjudicated in
Bullitt District Court, and civil matters, which must be adjudicated in Bullitt Circuit Court.
Section 14. Other Applicable Laws:
This Regulation shall not be interpreted or construed to permit smoking where it is
otherwise restricted by other applicable laws.
Section 15. Construction:
This Regulation shall be construed so as to further its stated purposes.
Section 16. Severability:
If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this Regulation or its application to
any person or factual context shall be held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect the remaining
provisions of this Regulation, which may be given effect independent of the provision or
application declared invalid.
Section 17. Public Education:
The Bullitt County Health Department shall engage in a continuing education program to
explain and clarify the purposes and requirements of this regulation to citizens affected by it, and
to guide owners, operators and managers in their compliance with it. Such program may include
publication of a brochure for affected businesses and individuals explaining the provisions of this
ordinance.
Section 18. Effective Date:
This Regulation shall be effective the 15th day of November, 2011. The foregoing
Regulation was read for the first time on the 15rd day of February, 2011, read for the second
time, passed and approved on the 17 day of May, 2011.
10 of 11
APPROVED BY:
James R. Cundiff, MD, Board Chainrian
ATTESTED TO:
Swannie Jett, DrPhc, MS, Board Secretary
11 of 11
FACT SHEET
Tobacco Use and Policy
Bullitt County
Manufactm'el'S that Permit Indoor Smoking
4
, 2008 25.0
ManufactUl'ers that Offer Cessation
4
, 2008 75.0
Manufacturers that Reimburse for Cessation
4
, 2008 50.0
*Data unavailable.
lUnweighted, 3-year pooled estimate" Source: Kentucky Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 20062008.
2Rate per 10,000 adult smokers""" Source: Local Health Department Tobacco Cessation Survey, 2009
30.0
66.0
59.4
aKentucky Depal'tmentfor Public Health, Office of Vital Statistics, 2007. Data are considered preliminary. Use caution when interpreting this
estimate.
4UK Tobacco Policy Research Program, http://www.mc.uky.edu/tohaccopolicy/KentuckyDataReportsl .,- Workplace policy 2008; School Policy 2009.
Workplace policy study includes only manufacturers with 50 or more employees. School policy study includes public and private middle and high
schools.
sUK Tobacco Policy Research Program, Percent Covered Database, June 2010: accessed from http;flwww.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicylOrdinances/Smoke-
ueeOrdinances.HTM.
6Kentucky Institute of Medicine. The Health of Kentucky: A County Assessment. Lexington, ICY. 2007. Higher numbers indicate poorer health
outcomes. A full report can be found at: http://www.kyiom.orgb?dflhealthy2007a.pdf
Prepared by:
Kentucky Center for Smoke-Free Policy
315 CON Bldg., 751 Rose St.
859-323-4587
www.kcsp.uky.edu
Updated August 2010
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Friday, February 18, 201112:49 PM
Mundy, Monica E; Kercsmar, Sarah
Cc:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Wagner, Kristian K; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah; Robertson, Heather E
RE: E-Cig Language in Ord
Monica,
Just talked to Ellen who is having some trouble with her email. Told her about this and that you were really on top of
getting intel about the magistrate's intentions as well as not handling this with a repeal. Ellen adds that amending the
ordinance is the only way and that it's critical for Becky to understand the bigger picture in terms of the state.
Apparently that's the next horizon for the opposition - a big repeal movement.
Thanks,
Carol
Sent: Friday, February 18, 201111: 15 AM
To: Mundy, Monica E; Kercsmar, Sarah
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Wagner, Kristian K; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah; Robertson, Heather E
Subject: RE: E-Cig Language in Ord
This is scary and could cause confusion in the media. You asked great questions, Monica!
Isn't there another mechanism besides r('pealing to rework their ordinance? I know Lexington amended their existing
law and the written documents were very hard to decipher as they went through it. Could they propose a substitute? Is
a question we could ask Judy or are we pretty sure the amendment process the only way. (Repealing obviously is a really
bad idea!)
Carol
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 201112:22 PM
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Riker, Carol A; Wagner, Kristian K; Johnson, John D
Subject: FW: E-Cig Language in Ord
Hi Sarah,
I tried to give Becky a call and she didn't answer so she must be on email out of the office. I know I sent her the
questions below, but is there anything else you think I should add?
Thanks,
Monica
To: 'rebecca.horn@grdhd.org'
Cc: Hahn, Ellen J; Riker, Carol A; Wagner, Kristian K; Kercsmar, Sarah; Johnson, John D
1
I am glad that a fiscal court member wants to address e-cigs but as you know, strengthening the current ordinance to
protect all workers is the best option.
What's the name of the fiscal court member interested in including e-cigs? Was he on the fiscal court when the Daviess
county's ordinance first passed? Do you consider him to be a friend?
When did he mention repealing the current ordinance? This morning a KCSP update went out regarding Campbell
County {I have attached the update below for your reference}. Last night, there fiscal court repealed there SF ordinance.
I just wonder if that had any influence on the way he is thinking about changing the current ordinance.
Are you going to meet with the fiscal court members individually? Does the coalition have any sense of where the fiscal
court members stand? Has the Daviess County coalition meet recently?
I am sorry for all the questions I know you may not know the answers to all of them yet. I am just trying to get a sense
of what's going on and if there is anything we can do to help!
I know your email has changed and I will make sure we get your new email on the partner list. I would also encourage
you to sign up on www.smokefreekentucky.com with your new email.
Thanks,
Monica
From: Rebecca Horn [mailto:rebecca.horn@grdhd.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 201111:41 AM
To: Mundy, Monica E
Daviess County. He is thinking about repealing and creating a new ordinance to include e-cigs. I will have to meet with
the commission to discuss the issue - which is good, because I am planning on meeting with them in the next month or 2
to assess where they stand on strengthening the current ordinance anyway. Can you send me Mr, Johnsons (is that his
name?). e-mail? I lost some of my contacts in the e-mail switch.
t<ebecct:vHorw
robacco-controbcor:J1"di:nat-or
(jreew t<!Ier DUtrtct1fealtlv
1501 t3rec!cenrtdffe'Street-
KY 42303
270-852-5486
F14" 270-926-9862
Click here to check us out on
http://www.facebook.com/pagesfT obacco-Control-Coalition-for-the-Green-River-D istrict/131726056857 439?ref=sgm
*This message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message or any attachment !s strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: or fax at 270-926
9862. .
2
From: Mundy, Monica E [mailto:monica.mundy@uky.edu]
To: rebecca.horn@grdhd.org
Could you give me a little background. Who is asking for the ordinance? Are they planning on drafting something?
Bardstown ordinance is located on our website
http://www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicy/Ordinances/ActuaIOrdinances/Bardstown.pdf . Be sure to include the findings
and intent also since it is a part of the ordinance.
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 11 :29 AM
To: Mundy, Monica E
I will need both. He specifically asked for a KY ordinance.
!?ebeccad{onv
Tobacco-Contrd-Co-ordt:;nat"or
(jreel1/!?wer OUtrtct?{ealt/v
1501 'Brec1cenrt:dffe'St"reee
& W ~ o ; KY 42303
pJio-n&. 270-852-5486
F ~ ' 270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.comfpagesfT obacco-Control-Coal ition-for-the-Green-River-Districtf131726056857 439?ref-sgm
*Thls message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not
the Intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dIssemination or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: 270-686-7747 or fax at 270-926-
9862.
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 10:27 AM
Subject: E-Cig Language in Ord
Hi Becky,
The only model ordinance to my knowledge is from ANR and it does contain language for E-cigarettes http://www.no-
smoke.org/document.php?id=229 . If you are looking for a local ordinance then Bardstown's ordinance does contain e-
cigarette language ( it was taken from the model ordinance). If you are going to share this information with elected
officials, I would encourage you to share the model ordinance first. Since each local ordinance is different, the model
ordinance will provide the best language for all parts of the ordinance.
Is this what you where looking for?
Thanks,
Monica
3
To: Mundy, Monica E
Subject:
Do you have a model ordinance from KY that includes language on e-cigarettes??
Reb-ecca-f{orw
r obacco-ControbCoordi:na:c-or
(jreewRtver Vi4t'rtct'f{ealtfv
1501 t3reclcenrttlge-strea-
&wel1.4l>ora; KY 42303
phone/. 270-852-5486
rat 270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.comioageslT obacco-Control-Coalition-for -the-Green-River-Districtl131726056857439?ref=sgm
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: or fax at
9862.
4
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Johnson, John D
Friday, February 18, 2011 11 :29 AM
Marijanovic, Nina
RE: Emailing: Madison - Health board discusses proposed e-cigarette ban. 01-26-2011
Wow - NY has really taken a stance on smoking!
To: Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: Emailing: Madison - Health board discusses proposed e-cigarette ban. 01-26-2011
Interesting development here in the state. New York has just banned e-cigs last month.
1
Spagnuolo, Amy R
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Marijanovic, Nina
Thursday, February 17, 20114:18 PM
Hahn, Ellen J; Johnson, John D; Kercsmar, Sarah
Emailing: Madison - Health board discusses proposed e-cigarette ban. 01-26-2011
Madison - Health board discusses proposed e-cigarette ban. 01-26-2011.pdf
Interesting development here in the state. New York has just banned e-cigs last month.
1
Richmond
Register
Richmond,KY
eirc.6828
From Page:
1
1/26/2011
70236
County:
Madison

ARE THEY HARMFUL OR . : .
Health board discusses proposed ecigarette ban
By LorIe Love Halley
ifegisler Editor
The Madison County Board of
Health discussed proposed
changes to its Clean Indoor Air
Regulation last week but did not
make a fmal vote on the amend-
ment, and at least two board
members expressed apprehension
about revising the ordinance.
In December, the board pro-
posed adding e-<:igarettes to the
products that were prohibited
from use inside public places. The
proposal was approved on }irst
reading, despite comments from
residents who said the devices
were safe and had helped them
stop smoking cigarettes.
The issue was on last week's
agenda only for discussion, and
formal comments were accepted
from residents who wanted to
speak about the proposed amend-
ment. They each were given two
minutes.
Resident Jim Sanders told the

Richmond
Register
Richmond,KY
eirc.6828
From Page:
A6
1/26/2011
70236
HEALTH
Continued /irlm page AI

board the devices do not
emit secondhand smoke,
and he could not find allY
test results that proved
other.wise.
He asked the board to
not take action on the
proposed changes until
substantial evidence of
the risks associated with
e-cigarettes was discov-
ered.
Jerry Hacker said ban-
ning e-cigarettes violates
the spirit of the Clean
Indoor Air llegulation,
which is to protect resi-
dents from secondhand
smoke.
Instead of releasing
nicotine by burning
tobacco in a cigarette,
cigar or pipe, e-cigarettes
heat a nicotine solution,
releasing a vapor that the
user inhales. A visible
vapor is exhaled.
Resident Bethany
Gibb also asked the
board to wait for conclu-
sive evidence of harm
before the
devI{'es.
"It seems like over-leg-
islation." shp said, amak-
ing something a law just
in case it is dangel'ous."
The hoard asked fOJ"
information from Kelly
O, .. 'ens, TohatTO
Progralll Coordinator for
the health department,
who said she could
nod allY research mat
called ,,-cigarettes safe.
are not
regulated or testp,d by the
FDA, whir'h Owens said
results in ineorIsiHtrncies
in their production.
"\Ve don't know thai
these art' colllpletely
safe'" Owens said. "In
nothing that I have found
does it claim they are
safe."
Dr. James Miller,
board member, said he
was concerned that the
board is getting into a
gray area by considering
banning the devices.
Member Michael
Oliver agreed, saying the
board needed to think
about the basis of its reg-
ulation when deciding
whether to amend it.
"I have a problem with
the health department
enacting laws, and I have
for the 15 years I've been
on the board," Oliver
said.
"The FDA considers
them illegal," he said. "If
they're illegal, we don't
need an ordinance.
1
'
Veterinarian Jack
Taylor, a board member,
said the reason he will
vote in favor of the ban is
twofold: One, it is an
. issu(' of modeling correct
hehavior for children;
and two, UIf we're not
sure if thev're safe or not,
we. should' fall on the side
of caution."
The board is set to
hear second reading of
the amendment at its
meeting in April.
If the amended regula-
tion passes on second
reading, smoking will be
defined as "inhaling,
exhaling, burning or car-
rying any lighted or heat-
ed cigar, cigarette or pipe,
or any other lighted or
heated tobacco or plant
product intended for
in any man-
ner or in any form./
Smoking also includes
the use of an c-cigarette,
which creates a vapOl; in
any manner or in any
fOnTI, or the use of any
oral smoking device for
the purpose of circum-
venting the prohibition of
smoking in this article."
A definition of e-ciga-
rettes was added to the
regulation, caIling an e-
cigarette "any electronic
oral device, such as one
composed of a heating
element, battery and/or
eleetronic circuit, '''hieh
provides a vdpor of nico-
tine or any other sub-
stances, and, the use or
inhalation of which sim-
ulates smoking. The term
shall include any such
device, whether manu-
factured, distributed,
marketed; or sold as an e-
cigarette, e-cigar, e-pipe,
or undei' any other pro-
duce name of descriptor."
horie hove Hailey can be
reached at editor@
richmondregister. COOl or

Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Thursday, February 17, 2011 3:28 PM
Kercsmar, Sarah
Cc:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Riker, Carol A; Wagner, Kristian K; Johnson, John 0
In December Ellen sent Becky the e-cig one pager and I sent her some other facts. I should probably send it again and
remind her that she can share it with the policymaker .
more.det8.ils
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 2:10 PM
To: Mundy, Monica E
The only thing I might add, Monica, is that we're seeing an emphasis on e-cigs as a derailing tactic by the opposition
more and more. Have you sent her the one pager on e-cigs?
Sarah
Faculty lecturer, Division of Instructional Communication
College of Communications and Information Studies, little library 310 M
College of Nursing, 751 Rose Street, 450B, lexington, KY 40536-0232
859-323-0603
859-323-1057 (FAX)
www.kcsp.uky.edu
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: FW: E-Cig language in Ord
Hi Sarah,
Thanks,
Monica
1
To: 'rebecca.horn@grdhd.org'
What's the name ofthe fiscal court member interested in including e-cigs? Was he on the fiscal court when the Daviess
County (I have attached the update below for your reference). Last night, there fiscal court repealed there SF ordinance.
Thanks,
Monica
To: Mundy, Monica E
to assess where they stand on strengthening the current ordinance anyway. Can you send me Mr, Johnsons (is that his
name?). e-mail? I lost some of my contacts in the e-mail switch.
'Reb-ecca-f{o-nv
r o-bacco-controbCoordtnat'or
6reew'River '04ft'rtct'f{ealt!v
150113red.enrtd.ffe'St'red
O W ~ o ; 1(Y42303
plr.orux' 270-852-5486
rfA1(.( 270-926-9862
2
http://www.facebook.com/pageslT obacco-Conlrol-Coal ilion-for -lhe-Green-River -0 islricti131726056857 439?ref=sgm
"This message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION Intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department or fax at 270-926-
9862.
http://www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicv/Ordinances/ActuaIOrdinances/Bardstown.pdf. Be sure to include the findings
From: Rebecca Horn [rnailto:rebecca.horn@grdhd.org]
To: Mundy, Monica E
I will need both. He specifically asked for a KYordinance.
J?ebecca-f{orw
r obacco-controbcoo-rdinat'or
(jreew J?iAler Vi4trta'f{ealtlv
1501
Owend>o-ro; KY 42303
Phone: 270-852-5486
Ta?U 270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.com/pageslT obacco-Conlrol-Coalition-for -the-Green-River -0 islricti131726056857 439?ref=sgm
from your system. If you re<:eived this message tn error, please notify the sender at the Green River DIstrict Health Department: 270-686-7747 or fax at 270926-
9862.
From: Mundy, Monica E [mailto:rnonica.mundy@uky.edu]
Hi Becky,
The only rnodel ordinance to rny knowledge is from ANR and it does contain language for E-cigarettes http:((www.no-
smoke.org/document.php?id=229. If you are looking for a local ordinance then Bardstown's ordinance does contain e-
cigarette language ( it was taken from the rnodel ordinance). If you are going to share this information with elected
3
Thanks,
Monica
To: Mundy, Monica E
Subject:
J?ebecc;vf{orw
r obacco-Corzh-obcourdi:naCor
tireew J?tver Vt:JtrtcC f{ealtlv
1501 BreckenrtdgeStreet"
( ! J j ( J ~ 0 ; KY 42303
Pltoruk- 270-852-5486
Fa? 270-926-9862
http://wwwJacebook.com/pages/T obacco-Control-Coal ition-for -the-Green-River -DistricU131726056857439?ref=sgm
the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message Qf any attachment is strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: 270686
M
7747 or fax at 270926
9862.
4
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Thursday, February 17,201112:22 PM
Mundy, Monica E
teaching class now -- will look at it when i get out at 2 :) _________________ _
To: Kercsmar, Sarah
Subject: FW: E-Cig Language in Ord
Hi Sarah,
Thanks,
Monica
To: 'rebecca.hoffi@grdhd.org'
I am glad that a fiscal court member wants to address e-cigs but as you know, strengthening the current
ordinance to protect all workers is the best option.
What's the name of the fiscal court member interested in including e-cigs? Was he on the fiscal court when the
Daviess county's ordinance first passed? Do you consider him to be a friend?
When did he mention repealing the current ordinance? This morning a KCSP update went out regarding
Campbell County (I have attached the update below for your reference). Last night, there fiscal court repealed
there SF ordinance. I just wonder if that had any influence on the way he is thinking about changing the current
ordinance.
Are you going to meet with the fiscal court members individually? Does the coalition have any sense of where
the fiscal court members stand? Has the Daviess County coalition meet recently?
I am sorry for all the questions I know you may not know the answers to all of them yet. I am just Hying to get
a sense of what's going on and if there is anything we cando to help!
I know your email has changed and I will make sure we get your new email on the partner list. I would also
encourage you to sign up on www.smokefreekentucky.com with your new email.
Thanks,
1
Monica
From: Rebecca Hom [mailto:rebecca.hom@grdhd.org]
Sent: Thnrsday, February 17,201111 :41 AM
To: Mundy, Monica E
Daviess County. He is thinking about repealing and creating a new ordinance to include e-cigs. I will have to
meet with the commission to discuss the issue - which is good, because I am planning on meeting with them in
the next month or2 to assess where they stand on strengthening the current ordinance anyway. Can you send
me Mr, Johnsons (is that his name?). e-mail? I lost some of my contacts in the e-mail switch.
Rebecca Hom
Tobacco Control Coordinator
Green River District Health
1501 Breckenridge Street
Owensboro, KY 42303
Phone: 270-852-5486
Fax: 270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tobacco-Control-Coalition-for-the-Green-River-
District/131726056857439?ref=l>gm
*This message and any attachment may contain PRNILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
intended forthe use ofthe above addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any dissemination or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District
Health Department: 270-686-7747 or fax at 270-926-9862.
Sent: Thursday; February 17,201110:41 AM
To: rebecca.hom@grdhd.org
Could you give me a little background. Who is asking for the ordinance? Are they plauning on drafting
something?
http://www.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicy/Ordinances/ActualOrdinances/Bardstown.pdf. Be sure to include the
findings and intent also since it is a part of the ordinance.
From: Rebecca Hom [mailto:rebecca.hom@grdhd.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 17,201111:29 AM
To: Mundy, Monica E
Rebecca Hom
2
Owensboro, KY 42303
Phone: 270-852-5486
Fax: 270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.comlpages/Tobacco-Control-Coalition-for-the-Green-River-
Districtl131726056857439?ref=sgm
*This message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
From: Mundy, Monica E [mailto:monica.mundy@ukY.edu]
To: rebecca.hom@grdhd.org
Hi Becky,
The only model ordinance to my knowledge is from ANR and it does contain language for E-cigarettes
http://www.no-smoke.org/document.php?id =229 . If you are looking for a local ordinance then Bardstown's
ordinance does contain e-cigarette language ( it was taken from the model ordinance). If you are going to share
this information with elected officials, I would encourage you to share the model ordinance first. Since each
local ordinance is different, the model ordinance will provide the best language for all parts of the ordinance.
Thanks,
Monica
From: Rebecca Hom [mailto:rebecca.hom@grdhd.orgj
To: Mundy, Monica E
Subject:
Rebecca Hom
Owensboro, KY 42303
Phone: 270-852-5486
Fax: 270-926-9862
3
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Tobacco-Control-Coalition-for-the-Green-River-
District/131726056857439?ref =sgm
*This message and any attachment may contain PRNILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
4
Spagnuolo, Amy R
Sent:
To:
Thursday, February 17, 201112:07 PM
rebecca.horn@grdhd.org
Cc:
Subject:
Hahn, Ellen J; Riker, Carol A; Wagner, Kristian K; Kercsmar, Sarah; Johnson, John D
Attachments: Campbell County repeals smoke-free ordinance
What's the name of the fiscal court member interested in including e-cigs? Was he on the fiscal court when the Daviess
County (I have attached the update below for your reference). Last night, there fiscal court repealed there SF ordinance.
Thanks,
Monica
From: Rebecca Horn [mailto:rebecca.horn@grdhd.orgj'
To: Mundy, Monica E
to assess where they stand on stren'gthening the current ordinance anyway. Can you send me Mr, Johnsons (is that his
name?). e-mail? I lost some of my contacts in the e-mail switch,
J?el>ecca-f{orw
r obacco-controbCoortitnat'or
6reew J?tver Vt:Jtrtct"lfealtiv
1501 Brec1cenrtclfJ&Street-
{ ' ) W ~ KY 42303
P!zorw( 270-852 -5486
Fa?4" 270-926-9862
1
http://www.facebook.com/pages/T obacco-Control-Coal ition-for-the-Green-River-Districti131726056857 439?ref=sgm
-rrhis message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message Of any attachment is strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: or fax at 270M926-
9862.
http:Uwww.mc.uky.edu/tobaccopolicy/Ordinances/ActuaIOrdinances/Bardstown.pdf. Be sure to include the findings
To: Mundy, Monica E
Rebecca-f{orw
robacco--ControtCoo-n;Unaror
(jreew RVer DUtrtct-f{ealtIz,-
1501
owenJi>oro; KY 42303
Pnone( 270-852-5486
270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.com/pages/T obacco-Control-Coalition-for-the-Green-River -D istrictl131726056857 439?ref=sgm
"This message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended for the use of the above addressee. If you are not
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: 270-686-7747 or fax at 270-926-
9862.
.. ...... .... - .... .. - .. .... .. .. -.... --... - ..
From: Mundy, Monica E [maiito:monica.mundy@uky.edu]
Hi Becky,
The only model ordinance to my knowledge is from ANR and it does contain language for E-cigarettes http://www.no-
smoke.org/document.php?id=229 . If you are looking for a local ordinance then Bardstown's ordinance does contain e-
cigarette language ( it was taken from the model ordinance). If you are going to share this information with elected
2
Thanks,
Monica
To: Mundy, Monica E
Subject:
!leaecca1(o-nv
robacco-co-ntrolcooninat'or
(jreeIV !lwer VUtrtct1fealtlv
1501 Brecl;enrtdtfe'Street'
KY 42303
270-852-5486
rat4" 270-926-9862
http://www.facebook.com/pages/T obacco-Control-Coalition-for -the-Green-River -Districtl131 726056857439?ref=sgm
message and any attachment may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended for the use ofthe above addressee. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination or copying of this message or any attachment Is strictly prohibited and should be deleted
from your system. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at the Green River District Health Department: or fax at
9862.
3

Kentucky Center For Smoke-Free Policy E-Mails Part 5

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Kentucky Center For Smoke-Free Policy E-Mails Part 5

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Spagnuolo, Amy R

From: Johnson, John D

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen