Posted on 07/21/2011 5:44:48 AM PDT by markomalley
The perception by teenagers and young adults that heavy cigarette smoking is a high-risk activity has declined in many states, according to a U.S. study on substance abuse and mental health released on Thursday.
The perceived risks of smoking one or more packs of cigarettes a day dropped between 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 in 14 states among youths aged 12 to 17, and in 31 states among those aged 18 to 25.
Perceived smoking risks also dropped in nine states among those 26 and older, a statement from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration said regarding the report.
"No state is free from the unique impact of mental and substance use disorders," SAMHSA administrator Pamela Hyde said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at old.news.yahoo.com ...
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
I assume this is a Federal government outfit? Nuke it.
///
Yes !
my child is already $46,000 in debt.
and most government programs are not just worthless,
but actually increase the things they try to get rid of.
(like the war on drugs and the war on poverty and the war on the “achievement gap”).
I’ve heard this before, but never seen documentation.
Can you point me to a website that verifies it?
Thanks!
It's not a bug, it's a feature. That's the way all bureaucracies, whether government or private, work. If they eliminate the problem, they also eliminate their reason for existence, and then the employees are looking for work.
All "good works" should be done by volunteers - unpaid volunteers with a day job or a dozen loads of laundry to do - so they won't become reliant financially or personally on the existence of the "client" population.
I bought a pack of Marlboros in Germany some years ago - it has a warning on it.
“If you smoke this ciagarette, you and everyone around you will die!”
I laughed so hard, I kept the pack. Still have it.
Working now, but will see if I can track it down this evening.
I work in a semi-scientific field and remember being absolutely stunned when I read the details of the EPA’s chicanery on this issue.
Even more shocked when it turned out nobody else was shocked. Lying in a sufficiently noble cause is apparently now virtuous.
When I use this as an example of scientifically unethical conduct in classes I teach occasionally, many of the students just cannot understand my point. If I disagree with the EPA’s conduct, it must be because I’m in favor of smoking and/or lung cancer.
Much the same POV pops up with regard to scientific study of the heritability of intelligence, only in an even more virulent form. Whether or not Group A is (on average) more intelligent than Group B is something that can be determined by good science. Those who object violently to even doing the science are pretty obviously clear in their own minds what will be found. So they insist nobody be allowed to look, as if ignoring facts makes them (and their consequences) go away.
The cigarette taxes which place a huge burden on the poor and hooked like my husband are a disgrace.
But at least I feel totally free to refuse to donate to any other charity because I ‘give at 7-ll.’
Thanks. Looks like you did my work for me.
As stated, I’m no fan of the tobacco companies, but good science is one of the few things we can trust in this world. It may get things wrong, but it won’t intentionally lie to us.
Yet here people go promoting lying if it’s in the cause of doing down evil Big Tobacco.
So who do we target and demonize next by bad science?
My grandfather died of lung cancer...more than thirty years after he had completely quit smoking.
Other relatives who do 2+ packs a day have lived up into their 90’s.
This included one who did not smoke but who had a life-long chewing tobacco habit. When he passed away at age 94 New York State listed “tobacco use” as a contributing cause of death on his death certificate.
Gotta have those statistics, dontcha know.
Hollywood is too effective in glamorizing smoking.
You forgot the sarcasm tag there, didn't you?
About the only time you see anyone smoking in contemporary movies is if they are a villain of some sort. There is even a group bound and determined to get any movie that has any smoking in it given an R rating..........unless it is a movie that makes smoking out to be evil, then it should get a G rating regardless of language, sex, or violence.
The anti-smoker cartel is actually evil.
I wasn’t being sarcastic at all, Hollywood glamorizes smoking, they make it hip and cool rather than a sign of personal weakness and addiction, and of being low class, grubby, and undisciplined and as an addiction largely picked up by our most uneducated, and low income Americans.
So the EPA impounded the findings and reworked the statistical criteria to show negative results anyway. Based on their final findings, second-hand smoke would have to be MORE toxic than first-hand smoke to have the effects claimed. Despite a concentration at least two orders of magnitude less.
When this “scientific” chicanery is pointed out, people at the time and since just don’t care. After all, it’s in a good cause.
///
too true!
and this is getting to be serious “1984” stuff...
the SAME thing is done on many fronts.
they did the SAME thing, about the extremely high increase of breast cancer, in women who had abortions.
MANY studies back to 1957 showed up to a 900% increase.
...now, recent “government” studies “prove” no correlation.
and the SAME thing with the Alzheimer’s / smoking link.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2751767/posts?page=3#3
and “global warming” is the best example, where they actually went back and doctored old temperature records, LOWERING temps 100 years ago, to artifically increase the “warming trend”. plus siting temp stations on city asphalt, removing rural sites fromt he database, etc.
You don’t know what you are talking about, but thank you for insulting me and many other FReepers. Wonderful example of class - low class that is.
I am no fan of the tobacco companies either, particularly Philip, but the demonization of not just the industry but the partakers of the products has gotten totally out of control.
In an effort to keep their #1 slot for market share, Philip Morris has sold out their customers and all of their competition by going along with the bans and the tax increases. Some of the conversations I have had in the past with PM executives got down right ugly. I caught them lying to their people far too many times. I don’t have a problem with folks disagreeing with me, but don’t lie to my face. That is a deal breaker right there.
Exactly.
All to enrich Big PhRma and favored grant junkie research scientists with tax payer money to produce bogus studies.
Kids today have no manners or respect (I never thought I would be the “you young whippersnappers!!!!” type but age gets everyone).
They are lazy and feel entitled but they are not stupid. They see Uncle Fester and Grandpa Muenster who smoked 2 packs of Camel unfiltered since they were 12 and are still at the family BBQ eating hot dogs. They are in their 70s.
Then they see the gubmint propaganda saying
I’m a vaper.
It just proves that centrally planned gubmint social engineering is no match for human engenuity.
EVERY TIME!
Hell, I’m waiting for the blueprints to making an atomizer and battery back, along with the recipe for e-liquid, to get out on the internets!
FUFDC!!
FUBATF!!
and..
FUBO!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.