SMH campus going tobacco-free

Nurse at Southampton Memorial Hospital, Rickmond have to leave the grounds to smoke when in the hospital is a tobacco-free campus on November 8. "I tend to try to give up," 49-year-old Franklin woman said. "It's about time. I've smoked since I was 13 years old." The ban means that visitors and employees can more light on the area, which includes parking, serving hospitals, four medical institutions and East Pavilion nursing home, said Ann Williams, director of marketing. Smoking is prohibited inside all buildings. The ban will also include areas Courtland Medical Center and Total Care family near the Belk department store on Armory Drive in Franklin. To help the estimated 10 percent of the 425 hospital employees who smoke free smoking cessation program will be offered to them and their families, Williams said. Rickmond plans to participate. "I plan to take advantage of every tool," she said. "As a long-term smoker, I know it will be a problem." Study in April marking Franklin as one of the least healthy communities in Virginia inspired the ban, said Williams. In a study of Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute Franklin takes a hundred and twenty-seventh of the 131 cities and counties in health. Results were associated with high levels of unemployment and poverty. The study found that 22 percent of Franklin smoke, which is 3 percentage points higher than the average state. "It makes sense for us to be a leader in the community, to make people healthier," said Williams. "We are a health care provider community." The hospital will provide free nicotine patches to employees and cessation counselors. Nicotine gum and tablets will be offered to visitors and staff, she said. Employees currently smoke in their cars, parking lots and outside the hospital, where benches and ashtrays are provided, Williams said. Rickmond, clinical coordinator of the medical surgical floor, goes to his car to smoke on privacy. "Smoking has always been the kind of conflict for me," she said. "I am very careful public smoker, but you want to live, what you teach." "I smoked for many years and do not get the same pleasure," Rickmond continued to say. "It's very expensive, and I am in the minority now. My life tends to choose healthy foods, exercise and diet." "(If they want to smoke), they should be on our property," Williams said. "Of course, we do not recommend them to go out or get on someone else's property. We really try to encourage our employees to take advantage of this opportunity to become healthier and give them the tools they need to quit smoking." "We're not trying to punish our smoking or our employees," she added. "It's a personal choice." Hospital smoking bans * Visitors and staff will have to leave the base Southampton Memorial Hospital smoking when the hospital is a tobacco-free campus on November 8. * Affected areas include parking lots that serve the hospital, four medical institutions and East Pavilion nursing home, according to officials. * Smoking is prohibited inside all buildings. * The ban will also include areas Courtland Medical Center and Total Care family near the Belk department store on Armory Drive in Franklin. * Hospital staff who smokes will be offered free smoking cessation programs for them and their families

Tobacco: Some Facts

I agree with much of the editorial on the new rules of smoking , but I can not agree with some points. Editorial justification for the taking of further restrictions on smoking in public places sound, but uses the absurd reduction ad technique to make the law appears unworkable. He claims that 10 million are generally designed to prevent toxic cloud of smoke drifting in the building phalanx smokers gathered at the entrance, it would work only if smokers were forced to carry the tape. One could also say that there should be no alcohol limit for drivers, if all equipped with breathalyzer. It ignores common sense. Most people know that there is a limit to how many drinks they can have if they want to move. In addition, most people know the difference between 10 cm and 10 meters. The law recognizes the essential difference between compliance and blatant disrespect. In addition, some centers have already implemented a rule, setting pointers 10m away from the entrance, saying that there is no smoking at this point. The case for plain packaging is also strong. Its purpose is to protect young people from starting. Studies show that young people "as" the regular updates and to find a simple package "boring." The package as a status symbol is more important for young people than for adults. Plain packaging will also remove the ability of cigarette companies falsely suggest that some brands, such as "light" and "low-tar" are less harmful than regular cigarettes. Arguments that tobacco is a legal or that South African court will come to a different conclusion from those in Australia do not carry any weight. Slavery and apartheid were legal, but that does not make them right. Tobacco can be legal, but it is also deadly, and it should be adjusted depending on the amount of damage it does. The law does not confer immunity from regulation. Finally, there is little doubt; a South African court will uphold the constitutionality of the just-packaging rules. In June, rejecting the call to British American Tobacco SA ban on advertising of tobacco products, the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein ruled: "There can be no doubt that the Government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from the devastating effects of tobacco," and that "a ban on advertising and promotion of tobacco is reasonable and justified. " The Constitutional Court upheld the decision. Both the Australian and South African courts have come to the same conclusion: that the measures proposed for the regulation of tobacco sound, reasonable and based on evidence.

Bangor panel debates tobacco limits in city parks

If a proposal by Bangor’s Wellness Committee is approved, there may be no butts about it when it comes to smoking on city park land. Members of the Bangor City Council’s parks, recreation and harbor committee wrangled over the idea — and possible implementation — of a policy limiting or banning the use of tobacco products in city parks Monday afternoon. Not everyone present at the meeting was in favor of any blanket resolutions, rule changes or ordinance enactments. Councilor James Gallant had reservations about any changes not involving input from smokers and nonsmokers alike. Parks and Recreation director Tracy Willette introduced the Wellness Committee proposal to ban the use of tobacco products in parks to the council committee, which had 10 members present. “This particular concept, like many others over the years, will get some good discussion about what we think will best succeed here, short- and long-term, and there are several options we can evaluate individually to determine what fits and what won’t,” said Willette. “Our initial approach was to bring this up formally and then follow this meeting up with another meeting.” The next meeting, tentatively scheduled for 6 p.m. Aug. 21 or 28, will be a public workshop involving the parks, recreation and harbor committee and Bangor’s Public Health Advisory Board. It also will be open to smokers and smokers’ rights groups to weigh in on any possible public policy. “Do we decide to go through an entire citywide ordinance, do we decide to take the approach of a citywide resolution or do we create an ordinance designating certain parts of parks as tobacco-free and some not?” said Willette, who used the city’s leash law as an example of the latter option, which allows for dogs off leashes on certain trails and park areas such as Cascade Park, Brown Woods and Prentiss Woods. “We’ll try to develop a couple of concepts at the workshop to bring to the council committee for discussion,” Willette added. “We’re very early in the process and will give plenty of opportunity for folks to weigh in along the way, and I think it’ll be a good discussion to have.” Gallant said he wasn’t comfortable enacting any kind of policy regarding tobacco use without involving both sides of the issue, meaning that smokers and smokers advocacy groups should be included in the discussion. “I don’t think it’s fair to ban anything if you only have those from one side involved in the process,” Gallant told fellow committee members. Shawn Yardley, Bangor’s Health and Community Services director, said the city has to frame the issue and take a position, either with a phased-in approach or an ordinance. “This isn’t about being against the smoker,” Yardley said. “What we are is for the health of everyone, so we want to frame this in a way that protects everybody’s right to breathe clean air without denying someone’s right to find some way to smoke.” Gallant also had reservations about the viability of enforcing any restrictions, be they through an ordinance, resolution or other form. “His concern from the beginning was about enforcement,” Yardley said. “My point is I don’t think that necessarily has to drive this because there’s a cost to the city in cleaning up after smokers with butts and tobacco products left behind.” Yardley, a former smoker who quit 23 years ago, has a personal preference when it comes to what form he would like city policy to take. “We’ve been successful at the Folk Festival in limiting where people can smoke and people have been really, really good about that, but that wouldn’t be my preference,” he said. “My preference would be to be clear with an ordinance and be strategic in enforcement of that through signs and training to help people intervene and remind people about smoking restrictions.” A phased-in approach could involve designating certain parks as ones where smoking is allowed and others — where children are regularly present — as ones where it isn’t. “When I first began my career, you could smoke at your desk,” said Yardley. “And then you could smoke in certain areas of the office. Then it was only outside, and then it was beyond 50 feet of the building. I’m confident that, over time, things will change.”

The area of the company recalled the rules of tobacco products

While some sellers are bound by the rules when it comes to selling tobacco products to underage people, unfortunately, there are some who are still trying to get, do not follow state law. Etailers, in addition to the retail trade throughout West Virginia, recently received the materials that will remind and help them comply with state law (WV State Code 16-9A-2), which prohibits the sale of tobacco products to youth under the age of 18 years. Although many officials already have other materials available to them, it became known, many are still convinced, WV State Code 16-9A-2, which prohibits the sale of tobacco products to young people and a small, sometimes confused when checking the date of birth on identifiers. Because of the high staff turnover, many retailers have to train employees on a regular basis. This is also the reason for the development and spread of See Red? Proceedings of the retail education. Financed with Federal Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPTA) block grant funds through the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, Office of Mental Health and medical facilities, "See the red?" The material was sent to all retailers in the state. Material retail education consists of two leaflets (for clarity) as well as labels for the registers resemble the law clerks. It has been reported, "See Red?" The materials were designed for simplicity, reminding owners / corporations and their employees not to sell tobacco products to customers under the age of 18 years, as many do not have much time to read volumes of information. Messages contained in the material covers retail to know that it is illegal to sell tobacco products to youth under the age of 18 years. Tobacco products include cigarettes, cigarette papers, pipes, cigars, blunts, small cigars (cigarillos), snuff and chewing tobacco, which includes chewing and other tobacco products. Retailers are also encouraged to always ask for ID when selling tobacco products and make sure the ID is not false. It has been reported, there are two WV graduated driver's license for young people aged under 18 who are currently active ID. One license, which is now closed, has a bright red background with a yellow stripe on the edge of the photo that shows the date the person turns 18. This license is not valid on the date of expiration. A second license has a red background, but it has the date of the youth turns 18, and 21 listed in the top right corner of the license. Employees should make sure to verify your date of birth using the red color coding (von license) as a red flag. If a customer tries to buy tobacco to 18 years listed on their licenses, they are not old enough to do it. They also said that if young people do not have ID, and not for sale. It's not worth the risk of being fined, and in some cases, fired. Citations issued for failure to state WV Code 16-9A-2 issued to the clerk at the point of sale, together with the shop owner and / or corporation. WV State Code 16-9A-2 indicates that subsequent violations at the same location or operating unit, firm, corporation or individual would lead to graduated fines. In addition, any employer who discovers that his or her employee sold or furnishing tobacco products to young people in the minor may dismiss a worker for the cause. Any such discharge is regarded as a "flagrant violation" for purposes of determining eligibility of the employee was discharged for unemployment benefits in accordance with WV State Code 16-9A-2, if the employer fails to provide written notice to the employee in the workplace, that such act or acts may result in to stop them from working. He also said that the federal mandate and complement the tobacco compliance checks are implemented during the year by various agencies in order to monitor compliance with WV State Code 16-9A-2. Any clerk who sells tobacco products by youth inspector compliance inspections will be listed on the site, a law enforcement officer. The shop owner / corporation will also be links. Secretary / shop owner / corporation will not only pay a penalty, but will also have to pay court costs. Reasons for retailers not to sell tobacco products to youth under the age of 18 years, include the following: This is against the law, we do not want retailers to get into trouble, it is harmful to children's health, and West Virginia could lose $ 3.5 million per year in Federal block grant dollars curative and preventive services should be a national of non-compliance (RVR-retailer violation rate) by more than 20 percent. In addition, the adoption of the Law on the Prevention of Smoking and Family Law Tobacco Control, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires that retailers verify the age of purchasers of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco, which are under the age of 27 with the help of photographic identification containing the date of birth of bearer. For more information about the retail requirements / penalties for Smoking Prevention and Family Law Tobacco Control.