rom: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:26 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> http://www.globalink.org/tobacco/docs/na-docs/uss4.htm
>
> 27 Feb 95
> The Maryland Court of Appeals upheld th
ate had one, why would
> MC need one as well.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 5:30 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> that's Mont. County
PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
that's Mont. County not the state of Maryland ;) no worries though just
having trouble finding where the Original statewide law was overturned.
- Original Message -
From: "Sandy Clark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 5:22 PM
Subject: RE: Where are the non-smokers?
>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A6
> 0687-2003Jul1¬Found=true
>
> -Original Message-
> From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: M
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A6
0687-2003Jul1¬Found=true
-Original Message-
From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:45 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
hrm News
ply a
matter of holding my breath when walking into a building (have to run the
guantlett of smokers next to the door).
-Original Message-
From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:26 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Where are the non-
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:30 PM
Subject: RE: Where are the non-smokers?
> Nope,
>
> It was poorly worded and ruled unconstitutional shortly after it was
> implemented.
>
> BTW I was smoking in a restaurant in Cascades, MD during drill this
weekend.
>
&
-Original Message-
From: William Wheatley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 4:25 PM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
Umm unless MD repealed the smoking ban then yes there is defiantly a smoking
ban. You can smoke where there is a bar but that is it
t its not as tough as CA
but was good enough for me. And from the looks of it only Mont. County and
its extreme ban was stopped.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 3:44 PM
Subject
; >living in such a great state.
> >
> >I miss my old maryland *sniff*
> >
> >:)
> >- Original Message -
> >From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Monday, August 04, 2
gt;:)
>- Original Message -
>From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 12:05 PM
>Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
>> exactly. And bars and restaur
M 8/4/2003 -0500, CF-Community wrote:
> >Subject: Where are the non-smokers?
> >From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 18:04:09 GMT
> >Thread:
> >http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=messages&threadid=9275&am
distance (one mile). I have to admit it was great being able to take off
for home for lunch, and being able to make it back to work in lots of time.
larry
At 02:06 PM 8/4/2003 -0500, CF-Community wrote:
>Subject: Where are the non-smokers?
>From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECT
> From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 2:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> > yeah and you have to cross the chesapeake bay bridge to get there
what about the ocean? Mountain!
William Wheatley writes:
> err Ocean
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 2:04 PM
> Subject: Re: Wher
WW> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 2:04 PM
WW> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>> yeah and you have to cross the chesapeake bay bridge to get there :P
>>
>> Actually I am talking about the DC suburbs; western MD is also stunningly
>> beautiful and quite cheap
err Ocean
- Original Message -
From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
> yeah and you have to cross the chesapeake bay bridge to get
ty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
> yeah and you have to cross the chesapeake bay bridge to get there :P
>
> Actually I am talking about the DC suburbs; western MD is also stunningly
> beautiful and quite
airly neutral department. It does tend towards
> cessation for health reasons, but from what I can tell it balances that
> with impact studies.
>
> -Kevin
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Monda
"Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 12:17 PM
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> > mmm ok there was clean indoor air but what else is to miss? The traffic?
>
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:10 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> amen
>
> >
> > I'm sure somebody will take it upon themselves to do peer reviewed
> > studies of this and we'll hav
gt;
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
> mmm ok there was clean indoor air but what else is to miss? The traffic?
> Driving up and down 270 at rush hour had me talking, quite seriously,
about
I think I saw something about this when I dug up some studies on smoking
before but I don't have time to go there right now and probably won't soon.
I am behind on about three projects. Might be time to turn email off and
get to it come to think of it. But maybe somebody does know what's going
on;
ng in such a great state.
>
> I miss my old maryland *sniff*
>
> :)
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 12:05 PM
> Subject: Re:
I eat out more and enjoy it more since Albuquerque passed the clean indoor
air ordinance in June :) There :) Anecdotal evidence :)
Seriously, there may be something to this issue but I am not convinced :)
Dana
jon hall writes:
> Where is the press releases and anecdotal evidence of the new
> no
amen
>
> I'm sure somebody will take it upon themselves to do peer reviewed studies
> of this and we'll have some real facts but until then you have one group
> making a lot of noise and generating a lot of bogus research FOR the ban and
> others doing everything they can to show they've been hu
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
> exactly. And bars and restaurants are different cases; bars probably do
> have a higher percentage of smoker patrons.
>
> S
Where is the press releases and anecdotal evidence of the new
non-smoker customers that we heard so much about?
Where there is smoke, there is fire. No pun intended :)
--
jon
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Monday, August 4, 2003, 11:18:21 AM, you wrote:
DT> I find the statistics rather suspect. Whe
t; From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 8:51 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> I question whethet this is in fact the case. Somebody somewhere has
> probably studied it but I don't have any statistic
WellI'm assuming that the statistics are correct with my analysis of
the situation and what it "says about non-smokers".
If the article is incorrect and exaggerated then no one really knows
what's going on and the initial argument is moot.
-Gel
-Original Message-
From: Dana Tierney
an Skinner
Web Programmer
BloodSource
Sacramento, CA
-Original Message-
From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 8:51 AM
To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
I question whethet this is in fact the case. Somebody somewhere has
probably
; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:16 AM
> Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
>
>
> > Actually, I don't ever think there was a message that non-smokers did not
> > frequent bar
Exactly.
--
jon
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Monday, August 4, 2003, 10:54:23 AM, you wrote:
AS> Well...
AS> It does say something about Non Smokers.
AS> If you ban smoking...and you lose 20% to 50% of your sales...
AS> Then that means you have lost smoking customers.
AS> It also means that th
oking areas, different ventilation systems, etc. Of course, that does not
> protect the non-smoking workers. I don't know what to do about them.
>
> - Matt Small
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Angel Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "C
> -Original Message-
> From: Angel Stewart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:54 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Where are the non-smokers?
>
> Well...
>
> It does say something about Non Smokers.
>
> If you ban smoking.
I find the statistics rather suspect. When I see things like "as much as"
20 to 50 percent, I think fudge factor. "As much as" means that this is an
example of a high number. I smell industry press release. At best this is
anecdotal.
It also seems to assume that there are more smokers than non-smo
mmunity" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: Where are the non-smokers?
> Actually, I don't ever think there was a message that non-smokers did not
> frequent bars & restaurants because of smoking. the ban was to
non-smokers
>
munity" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 10:54 AM
Subject: RE: Where are the non-smokers?
> Well...
>
> It does say something about Non Smokers.
>
> If you ban smoking...and you lose 20% to 50% of your sales...
>
> Then that means you have lost sm
Well...
It does say something about Non Smokers.
If you ban smoking...and you lose 20% to 50% of your sales...
Then that means you have lost smoking customers.
It also means that those smoking customers whom you have lost, have
*not* been replaced with non-smoking customers.
Part of the reason
That doesn't say anything about non smokers it simply says the smokers are
going where they can still pollute the air thats all.
- Original Message -
From: "jon hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 04,
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/08/03/smoking.boon.ap/index.html
Those hordes of non-smokers that never ate out because of smoking
allowed in restaurants just don't seem to exist.
--
jon
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
~
41 matches
Mail list logo
