View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 3rd, 2014, 12:35 am



Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc 
Author Message
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11968
Post Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
DetNews wrote:
Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, coverage for autism treatments
Last Updated: September 14. 2011 2:02PM

Karen Bouffard/ Detroit News Lansing Bureau

Grand Rapids— Gov. Rick Snyder on Wednesday called for smoke-free beaches in Michigan, a state registry of childrens' weight information and insurance coverage for autism treatments in his health and wellness address.

In his comments at the Heart of the City Health Center, he also called for getting more veterans enrolled in health care offered by the Veterans Administration, giving children better access to healthier foods and exercise, and making sure young pregnant women get prenatal care.

Doctors would calculate childrens' body mass index and report it to the Michigan Care Improvement registry, Snyder spokeswoman Sara Wurfel said on Tuesday. The child would remain anonymous. The registry run by the Department of Community Health is the same one used to report childhood immunizations.

Snyder introduced Wednesday a 4-by-4 program asking people to work on BMI, weight, blood pressure and cholesterol. To drive his point home he announced his own statistics: "I'm stepping up today to say I'm doing 4-by-4, and I'm happy to share my BMI, 26.8, and weight, 192 pounds. My blood pressure is 102 over 60."

He added his cholesterol is 183 and 115 for LDL. Blood sugar is 99.

He also announced a summit on teen pregnancy in Ypsilanti on Oct. 17.

"We need to reduce infant mortality; our numbers are not good," he said. "We need to work with these mothers before these babies arrive."

Snyder also said his administration will look in the next budget for increased money for kids' dental programs.

Drew Eason, CEO and executive director of the Michigan Dental Association, applauded the focus on dentistry.

"Michigan's Healthy Kids Dental program is considered a model for the nation, yet it only reaches one-third of Medicaid-eligible children and few in the state's largest urban areas," Eason said. "The MDA has long worked to expand this program. Now's the time to get it done."

On autism, Snyder said: "One out of every 110 kids have autism. There are now ways to have successful treatments for more of our kids and those children can have a close to normal, productive life."

He noted 27 other states now provide insurance coverage for autism therapies.

Autism Speaks, the national advocacy group for those affected by the disorder, applauded Snyder's call for insurance coverage of therapies and reiterated their support for two bills in the Senate that would require coverage to be offered for children up to the age of 18 and a maximum of $50,000 a year.

"Without insurance coverage, Michigan families often pay as much as they can out-of-pocket for services that can cost upwards of $50,000 per year," said Peter Bell, Autism Speaks executive vice president for programs and services. "In the process, many risk their homes and the educations of their unaffected children — essentially mortgaging their entire futures."

The governor also unveiled his plans for the state's health insurance exchange. A bill to create it was introduced in the Senate on Tuesday.

The exchange will be called the Michigan Health Market Place. He said it will be based on four principals: It has to allow for individuals and businesses to go shopping and compare options; shouldn't add bureaucracy or cost to citizens; shouldn't be the only option; and should be focused on customer service.

The federal Affordable Care Act requires each state to form an exchange for insurers to compete to provide low-cost plans to individuals and small businesses.

States must make progress on creating an exchange by Jan. 1, 2013, or the federal government can come in and create the plan for them. The exchanges must be up and running by Jan. 1, 2014.

In conjunction with the exchange, Snyder will ask the Legislature for a major overhaul of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.

"(We need to) recognize BCBS, they've been a major factor in our state for a number of years, and will have a continuing important role," Snyder said.

Andrew Hetzel, vice president for Corporate Communications for Blue Cross Blue Shield said the company has been in discussions with the administration and Legislature about updating regulations. Changes to what Hetzel called "Michigan's antiquated regulatory system" will mean lower insurance costs for employers and consumers.

kbouffard@detnews.com
(517) 371-3660


From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110914/LIF ... z1XxaMNgrd

Smoke-free beaches??? WTH??? Isn't this guy supposed to be a Conservative???

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


September 14th, 2011, 4:22 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
Woohoo! Win for clean air!

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


September 14th, 2011, 4:42 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11968
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
steensn wrote:
Woohoo! Win for clean air!

:shock: :confused:
WooHoo! Win for expanding the nanny state! Loss for Freedom! ](*,)

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


September 14th, 2011, 5:00 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
Gain of freedom, people are FORCED to smoke with all the other smokers. Matters on your perspective, smokers can't smoke in a certain location but non-smokers can not smoke in a certain location.

Just like gun owners can't shoot people and people don't have to be shot. Less rights for the gun owners, more rights for the person. Trade-offs... silly nanny state rules I know... my bad.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


September 14th, 2011, 6:56 pm
Profile
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
Steen, I'm sorry, but when you're at the beach most of, if not all of the smoke from someone next to you is gone by the time you would have a chance to breath it. This is ridiculous. I don't smoke, and I probably never will, but this goes too far.

What's next... banning bonfires for the same purposes? I know I smell bon fires all the time. I'm being forced to breath that dirty air, why is that any different? The same can be said about fireplaces...


September 14th, 2011, 7:04 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
BS, smoking outside you smell it directly. Most people can smell cigarette smoke from the car in front of them on the highway.

If bonfires are causing surrounding people to get smoked out then yes. If it is on private property not causing anyone problems then feel free just like smoking a cigarette.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


September 14th, 2011, 7:10 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2748
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
What does gun owners shooting people have anything to do with rights? Shooting people isn't a right, owning is. Your mind is seriously retarded if that's what you think the gun rights issue is about.

Smoking outside anywhere isn't a violation of your rights. The air dilutes any possible chances of anything happening to you. The exhaust of a car or bus is 10000 times more lethal and it doesn't have to be kept away from people outside. For someone that is so concerned about clean air, you have no clue about the qualities of air that prevent smoking from being an issue outdoors. The only issue with indoor smoking is ventilation. Outdoors there is 0% risk. The only reason beach bans come into place is pollution because people throw butts in the sand.


September 14th, 2011, 7:10 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: October 26th, 2005, 11:48 pm
Posts: 3039
Location: Elkhart, In.
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
Seems like more wasted legislation....

Why not focus on things like: JOBS

I sent Schneider an idea concering a program that takes people off of welfare and empowers them to work.

My idea was to take the money from welfare and use it as a payment system for hours worked. Example: Graffiti control, abandoned home refurbishment or destruction as needed. You pay welfare recipients a flat wage of $10.00/ hour and you put them to work doing these projects. They learn job skills, earn a sense of worth because they are contributing/learning, and fending for themselves, and you are beautifying a city or neighborhood. If Ray spent a hard days work cleaning grafitti, he's going to pin somebodies ears back that he sees tagging what he just cleaned or painted. A dog does crap in his own den kind of thing...

Child care could be taught and supervised by approved (back ground check) supervisors, mean while mothers could do the child care and learn housekeeping skills as needed. This would not be gender specific, but I'd rather have mothers mothering, than not.

This seems more of a legitimate piece of legislation as compared to something that will cost a lot of money and is UNENFORCABLE.

_________________
2 Chronicles 10:14, "if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land."


September 15th, 2011, 8:47 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11968
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
njroar wrote:
Smoking outside anywhere isn't a violation of your rights. The air dilutes any possible chances of anything happening to you. The exhaust of a car or bus is 10000 times more lethal and it doesn't have to be kept away from people outside.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Remember folks, you always have the right to turn-around and walk in the other direction if you don't like what lies ahead :wink:

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


September 15th, 2011, 9:19 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
njroar wrote:
What does gun owners shooting people have anything to do with rights? Shooting people isn't a right, owning is. Your mind is seriously retarded if that's what you think the gun rights issue is about.


You are the one not thinking about this critically. You are assuming it isn't a right because that just "seems wrong." Take a step back and look at it philosophically, we only get upset when we hear stuff like that because itt goes against what we were taught culturally. Taking a step back, anarchy is the perfect form of freedom, but that doesn't work so we have to make laws that protect someones freedom to harm another person for example. If it weren't something that could be done then it wouldn't need a law to protect someone. It isn't a "right" to kill someone because culturally we feel "it just makes logical sense" to write it off as not one.

You balk at the comparison because you personally don't see the connection as you don't see it in the same light. While it isn't as direct or timely, it is still harmful to another person. I picked something extreme to show that we are not using logic here in this discussion to see this objectively, we are looking at this VERY subjectively based on societal norms, not logically.

njroar wrote:
Smoking outside anywhere isn't a violation of your rights. The air dilutes any possible chances of anything happening to you.


Nonsense, you clearly have never been around smokers outside. Smoke does not just "dilute" right away and go away. It sticks together and drifts wherever the wind takes it. Next time you get a chance, go watch the smoke. It is thick, it sticks together unless it is very windy and it sits. The stank don;t go away and it certainyl doesn't "dilute" immediately. That is just a farce.

njroar wrote:
The exhaust of a car or bus is 10000 times more lethal and it doesn't have to be kept away from people outside.


And it is causing cancer and other respiratory problems. California had to make mandates just to make the air less lethal from car exaust. LA is still pretty gross air wise and there are lots of problems. Here is another farce you have... this crazy idea that no one is bothered by vehicle exhaust. I get just a frustrated when a car drives by and I get that huge wiff of nasty as I do smoking. Why? Because I realize what I just breathed in. Just because CULTURALLY we have ignored it doesn't make the issue go away.

That is why we need clean power production that can power cleaner transportation. To get rid of this verry thing you are trying to write off. If it wasn't a problem then we wouldn't have laws to protect us from the very worst that it could be. The reason you car keeps going up in price and gas mileage keeps going up is from these exact laws to help protect us from the very thing you act as it no one is bothered by and is ignored by the same people complaining about smoke.

For someone conserned about making a statement, you sure don't get the facts first before you say things...

njroar wrote:
For someone that is so concerned about clean air, you have no clue about the qualities of air that prevent smoking from being an issue outdoors. The only issue with indoor smoking is ventilation. Outdoors there is 0% risk. The only reason beach bans come into place is pollution because people throw butts in the sand.


Nonsense, that is a total farse and it tetlls me you are either a smoker and don't care or haven't actually been around smokers outside. Smoke doesn't "disperse." It's physical properties hold it together depending on the wind direction (just hope your not downwind).

Quote:
California (2). Klepeis, et al. (2007) measured OTS respirable particle
concentrations in outdoor patios, on airport and city sidewalks, and in parks.
They also conducted controlled experiments of SHS indoors and OTS outdoors.
Klepeis et al. (2007) found that mean SHS particle concentrations outdoors can be
comparable to SHS indoors. Within about 2 feet of a smoker OTS was quite high
and comparable to SHS concentrations measured indoors. They found that levels
measured in 2 sidewalk cafés were detectable at distances beyond 13 feet. They
found that in contrast to SHS, OTS does not accumulate and that OTS peaks are
more sensitive to source-receptor proximity and wind velocity. Thus, long-term
averages for OTS concentrations are averaged over a large number of transient
peaks, which only occur when smokers are active, whereas indoor concentrations
remain high long after cigarettes have ended, and the total dose to a person
indoors from each cigarette will be greater than for a cigarette smoked outdoors.
Klepeis et al. (2007) found upwind OTS concentrations very low and downwind
OTS much higher.


Quote:
The experiments showed that OTS smoke levels did not
approach background levels either for fine particles or carcinogens until about 23
feet from the source.


Quote:
Conclusions: Field studies plus controlled experiments demonstrate that,
regardless of which way the wind blows, an individual in an outdoor cafe,
transiting through a building doorway, or otherwise surrounded by a group of
smokers, is always downwind from the source. They also show that under some
conditions, outdoor levels of tobacco smoke (OTS) can be as high as indoor levels
of secondhand smoke (SHS). Outdoor smoking bans are already common in
Canada (Figure below).


http://www.repace.com/pdf/OTS_FACT_SHEET.pdf

Do some research...

Outdoors only have the POTENTIAL to disipate the smoke over time. If smoking is active it is still hanging around. If smoking is not active it typically goes away. That is the difference... not the risk the period to which the risk is there.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


September 15th, 2011, 9:25 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
TheRealWags wrote:
njroar wrote:
Smoking outside anywhere isn't a violation of your rights. The air dilutes any possible chances of anything happening to you. The exhaust of a car or bus is 10000 times more lethal and it doesn't have to be kept away from people outside.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Remember folks, you always have the right to turn-around and walk in the other direction if you don't like what lies ahead :wink:


But I don't have a right to go there smoke free. It's balancing rights that you guys are compelety ignoring. In public places, you have to balance the rights of people to do things and the consiquences to others when they do because those consiquences take away the rights of others.

I know our culture could care less about the consiquences of our actions to others but at some point we have to realize it and man up instead of blaming others for being "too sensetive." One group get's angry because they can't smoke at the beach the other get's angry because they can't go to the beach without smoke. Why ignore one side it complete ignorance?

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


September 15th, 2011, 9:27 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 11968
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
steensn wrote:
But I don't have a right to go there smoke free.

Sure you do, if you don't smoke then you're going 'smoke free' :wink:

Sounds akin to those that complain about content on the radio or tv, you can always change the channel if you don't like what is being broadcast; just like you can always go to another restaurant/bar/etc if you don't like how they're being run or you can go to another beach if you don't like the one you're at. There is NO need to legislate this and I would content that it is yet another example of our shrinking freedoms.

Here's the real question IMO: WHY does it have to be LEGISLATED??? Why does everything seemingly have to be legislated these days. Its called FREEDOM use it or lose it.

Ron Paul wrote:
“What he should do is whatever he wants to do and assume responsibility for himself,” Paul responded, adding, “That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risk. This whole idea that you have to compare and take care of everybody…”

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


September 15th, 2011, 10:29 am
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2748
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
Again, one study to backup your claim doesn't make it a fact. If I get directly behind a bus or car and suck in the exhaust, i'm gonna die on the spot. But I can sit next to the side walk 5 feet away and smell it, but not be effected by the chemicals that are dangerous. Why? Because the odor agents don't break down. Walk by a candle shop... air pollution? No, even without burning, the candles give off a scent. When someone smokes, the cigarettes give off a smell that isn't effected by the smoke being broken down. Are candle shops going to be banned now because the smell isn't pleasing to everyone? Perfumes? Colognes?

You talk about Cali's air, yet NJ where I live is the most densely populated state. We have more people in a closer proximity, so shouldn't the effects be similar?

I used to be a smoker. I quit almost 2 years ago. And you do realize that most of what you see from someone exhaling smoke is water vapor? ~99% of the chemicals and bad stuff in the cigarettes gets absorbed by the lungs, hence why its so bad for us. What you exhale is the water moisture that is absorbed into the lungs along with the chemicals effecting the smell because they're too dense to get absorbed.

The high absorbing factor of the lungs is what proves there is a lot of bad science with 2nd hand smoke.


September 15th, 2011, 10:34 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
njroar wrote:
Again, one study to backup your claim doesn't make it a fact.


And your conjecture based on nothing and zero science doesn't help your case. If you want I can find more if because you want to take the petty stupid route of claiming there is only one study. I'm sorry if I didn't meet your minimum quota of X as you have to stringently done to date...

Why even take the time to say something that stupid?

njroar wrote:
If I get directly behind a bus or car and suck in the exhaust, i'm gonna die on the spot. But I can sit next to the side walk 5 feet away and smell it, but not be effected by the chemicals that are dangerous. Why? Because the odor agents don't break down. Walk by a candle shop... air pollution? No, even without burning, the candles give off a scent. When someone smokes, the cigarettes give off a smell that isn't effected by the smoke being broken down. Are candle shops going to be banned now because the smell isn't pleasing to everyone? Perfumes? Colognes?


Yup, suck ona car pipe and yes you will die wuickly, but car exhaust is not smoke and is not physically the same property as I noted that smoke has. Do some research, learn a bit, don't take something that is physically different and try and say they act the same. They don't...

As I have already stated and you are ignoring is the fact that I think car exhaust is a problem and we need to fix it. We unfortunetly rely on it for transportation and don't have a solution in place yet to deal with it. My impact on this issue is that I choose to live close to work, I own cars that are as small as I can get by with without having too large a vehicle sucking up more gas unreasonably. I'm also dedicating my career to finding ways to produce energy in such a way that we can cleanly supply alternative fuel cars through electricity as to not just move the burden of pollution to a coal plant.

Keep ignoring the fact that we regulate heavily the car efficiency and it's output and keep raising it every other year. We are on a trend to see the exhaust from cars all but dissapear... wuit using the car exhaust exampe in complete ignorance. It only hurts your point... badly.

njroar wrote:
You talk about Cali's air, yet NJ where I live is the most densely populated state. We have more people in a closer proximity, so shouldn't the effects be similar?


They are! You just have Cali to thank for regulations causing car manufacturers to clean up their exhaust! Say "thank you California!"

njroar wrote:
I used to be a smoker. I quit almost 2 years ago. And you do realize that most of what you see from someone exhaling smoke is water vapor? ~99% of the chemicals and bad stuff in the cigarettes gets absorbed by the lungs, hence why its so bad for us. What you exhale is the water moisture that is absorbed into the lungs along with the chemicals effecting the smell because they're too dense to get absorbed.

The high absorbing factor of the lungs is what peroves there is a lot of bad science with 2nd hand smoke.


Too bad the data taken of the air in places where smokers smoke tell us a different story. Likely because the smoke isn't there long enough and/or doesn't have enough surface area to actually absorb it all. FACTS are that the air around smokers is MEASURED as very toxic. Please... do some research instead of crappy science comments.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


September 15th, 2011, 10:55 am
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3761
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Snyder calls for smoke-free beaches, etc
I swear Steensn beilefs on out door smoking reminds me of my childhood.
anyone with siblings rememer the whole "He/She Keeps looking at me" when you were 8?

same thing steensn is doing right now. he's abondonded commen sense and any form of practical thinkin . there is NO harm in it...he just doesn't like it and people should just stop "looking at him". it's gotten to the point that he's demeaning himself more and more with each ignorant post about it...the sad thing is he so obtuse he doesnt even recognize it.

And go ahead and respond all ya want steensn...I wont be reading it. I learned long ago you are blind to the realities of the "harms of smoking" and instead attack this subject with all the ferver of a witch hunt.

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


September 15th, 2011, 2:52 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.