The Emporia Gazette

Barnett to step down from Senate seat

She delivered small businesses to her grant masters at nicotine replacement so watch for her next move. I am purely guessing that she will get a cushy job with either the Cancer Society or Tobacco Free Kansas, both grant funded by nicotine replacement.
Did you REALLY think she gave a rat's patoot about your health or the County tax payers?? PSHAW! Grant said to beg, borrow, or steal to get the ban, and she delivered on all counts.

September 9, 2010 at 12:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

County, hospital and health center look at collaboration

County employees should not be collaborating with private entities. They tend to forget whom they are working for when they collaborate. Same as Walters collaborating with drug companies and their grants. Who is she working for? It is not the tax payers!

September 9, 2010 at 12:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Barnett to step down from Senate seat

STEVE CORBIN FOR SENATE!!!!! And Barnett has owned a home in Kansas City for some time. Does he have one in Topeka too?

September 9, 2010 at 8:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Less tax on liquor

Steve Corbin to replace Barnett!!!!!!!!!!!!

September 9, 2010 at 7:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Barnett to step down from Senate seat

Walters? WALTERS? The biggest pharma grant sponge in Emporia. The pseudo "scientist" roaming the bars with the tube hanging from her purse? Oh NO, Say it isn't SO? We do NOT need another bought off with nicotine replacement money person in the Kansas government. We are over the limit now!

September 9, 2010 at 7:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Campaign, coffee, and questions

Since some of us are too stupid to know what to eat or where to go drink a beer and avoid smoke, perhaps the government should take care of us. Ban meat, ban sugar, ban fake sugar, ban fast food, ban buffets, ban hugs (germs), ban guns, ban baseball bats, ban car racing (uses too much gas), roll up the sidewalks at dark, no one out after curfew, ban reading books about freedom, ban computers, ban cell phones, ban cars that go over 35 miles per hour. Welcome to the brave new world of government nannism, brought to you by drug and insurance companies, who own our government, and several of our local politicos. (No need to mention their names, it's pretty obvious)

May 25, 2010 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Campaign, coffee, and questions

Oops! Let me change that to Ratfinkasaurusrex! If you were protecting your neighbors, you would be working to ban the selling of all tobacco products. I highly doubt your neighbors only smoke in bars. Small business people BUILT this country with their hard work, time, and tears. Let THEM decide what they want to provide to customers, and then let the customers decide where they want to go. No healthy person has EVER taken one whiff of second hand smoke and fallen over dead. NO heart attack drop in communities with tavern smoking bans. No one says this trash except the paid off flunkies of the drug companies who sell nicotine replacement, who, by the way, paid for all the full paid ads in the paper, and provide grants to professional grant spongers. Top of the morning.

May 25, 2010 at 8:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Board hears allegation of threats

http://www.acpm.org/education/residen...

Here is why and how Pfizer and other members of the Johnson and Johnson "family" of companies has come to own our government. It's for their own profit, at our expense. It is to lobby to make laws that help sell their own products. Simple marketing plan. Brilliant. And it reaches right into the Health Department and into the County Commission and to political candidates.

May 20, 2010 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Board hears allegation of threats

Follow the money. Walters, Barnett, Health Department grants, newspaper revenue from ads, skyrocketing cost of nicotine replacement. Then remember that the new "war" on sugar started the day that Johnson and Johnson bought the rights to Splenda. The same paid tobacco nannies are now paid fat nannies. God Bless America, and God Bless small business people. They had the courage to invest their times and lives to providing jobs and revenue. The grant sponges do nothing but take take take. But they have the money from pharma to drive us all crazy with their nonsense. Sorry the truth is lengthy, the truth always is. It's never a soundbite.
Send Barnett to Washington and he will serve the same masters that he has here. And it won't be small business people.

May 20, 2010 at 8:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Board hears allegation of threats

According to independent Public and Health Policy Research group, Littlewood & Fennel of Austin, Tx, on the subject of secondhand smoke……..

They did the figures for what it takes to meet all of OSHA’S minimum PEL’S on shs/ets…….Did it ever set the debate on fire.

They concluded that:

All this is in a small sealed room 9×20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.

For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes

“For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes

“Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.

“For Hydroquinone, “only” 1250 cigarettes

For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time

The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.

So,OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :

Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)…It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded.” -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec’y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997

WHAT! DILUTED BELOW PERMISSABLE LEVELS

By the way ASH dropped their lawsuit because OSHA was going to make a rule and that rule would have been weak and been the law of the land,meaning no smoking bans would ever have been enacted anywhere,simply because an open window or a ventilation system would have covered the rule.

Let me also tell you that the relative risk for shs/ets by the SG report of 2006 was a 1.19 ”EPA study is whats used to call it a carcinogen”……milks is a 2.43 and that glass of chlorinated water your about to drink is a 1.25 yet these things aren’t determined to be a carcinogen….The gold standard in epidemiology is a 3.0….Now had the SURGEON GENERAL included 2 other shs/ets studys the relative risk for disease from shs/ets would have been nearer a.60-.70 meaning it would have a protective effect against ever getting disease.

The next time you see a healthscare claim
consider the source.Especially if it comes from a government or non profit agency!

There has never been a single study showing that exposure to the low levels of smoke found in bars and restaurants with decent modern ventilation and filtration systems kills or harms anyone.

A small amount of smoke from tobacco in a decently ventilated venue
is a statistically insignificant health risk..

http://thetruthisalie.com

http://www.citizensfreedomalliance.org

May 20, 2010 at 8:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )