for a long while, in a previous professional life, i was a tobacco control advocate. i worked on the framework convention on tobacco control, coordinated legislative proposals in “the global south,” and helped review “how-to” manuals released by such august organizations as the UICC and the american cancer society.

it was interesting work, and i was, i still believe, fighting the good fight.

but as with many well-intentioned projects, there comes a time when the work spontaneously becomes reductio ad absurdum. such is the case with old morris tobacconists, in the city of victoria, british columbia.

Rick Arora is caught in a situation you would only expect to find in a dark comedy about bureaucracy run amok. If he covers up the historic signs on Old Morris Tobacconists, the City of Victoria is threatening big fines.

If he doesn’t, the Vancouver Island Health Authority plans to charge him under provincial laws banning tobacco ads and displays where people under 19 can see them.

my take remains the same as it was when i discovered harpercollins had removed the cigarette from the jacket photo of clement hurd, the illustrator for goodnight, moon (coincidentally one of my favorite children’s books ever): enough already. pre-verbal children won’t become smokers because of a barely-visible butt in an old black-and-white photo, and i seriously doubt teenagers are going to have an uncontrollable urge to light up after seeing antique signs for “house blend tobaccos” and “havana cigars.”

yes, public health measures are by nature coercive. but when they attempt to rewrite history, they go too far. such exercises are more fitting of stalinists and the taliban - company that public health advocates in “free” societies should be loathe to keep.

hat tip: james.

her pollster/chief political strategist: mark penn.

mark penn: worldwide ceo of burson-marsteller.

burson-marsteller: the pr/ad agency behind the national smoker’s alliance, philip morris‘ “grassroots” smokers’ advocacy group.

(b-m seems to like playing both sides. no honor among advertising agencies?)

dog decided he wanted attention at 7:30 despite my best attempts to sleep in (the husband had spent time with him last night so i could go to sleep early), and after rushing outside to pee, he’s curled up under the blanket with me on the couch. so i’m reading the WaPo. and i’ll share the headlines i found interesting enough to click. because it’s that or fall asleep on the couch and get a crick in my neck.

1. RI wonders if it can divorce a lesbian couple married in MA. maybe it’s because the preliminary schedule is set for my birthday, or maybe it’s just ‘cuz i think that full faith and credit should let RI divorce the couple just like they would a hetero couple married out of state. or perhaps it’s because it’s proof that queers are just like heteros: they marry, and they divorce. but with case law in RI silent on same-sex marriage, i don’t see what the problem is. assert jurisdiction, make a decision, and let the appellate court figure it out.

2. porn for pandas. now this is fascinating, because i didn’t know that pandas could process 2-d images. or maybe not:

On the use of movies, Zhang said: “It’s the sounds of breeding that stimulate them. Pandas are just like human beings. They understand everything.”

and it’s a whole different take on furries.

3. unfortunately, this one turned out to be a boring, pointless article. so the kid sheds his goth persona on turkey day for the sake of his family. yay. and he’s different than any of the rest of us who behave at the family dinner for the sake of harmony how? maybe he could dress up like a pilgrim.

4. and finally, effective december 1 of this year, the national zoo bans smoking on its grounds. (if topeka can do it, it can’t be that big a deal.) this, coupled with dc’s antismoking legislation taking full effect on january 1, makes me a happy jack-booted public health nanny-state thug.

On January 1, 2007, bars, nightclubs, private clubs, brew pubs and bar areas of restaurants are required to be smokefree. This applies to establishments that hold a tavern license (Class C/T or D/T), a club license (Class C or D), a brew pub permit (Classes C/R, D/R, C/T, or D/T) or a nightclub license (Class C/N or D/N). Establishments that hold a restaurant license (Class C/R or D/R) may allow smoking until January 1, 2007, in the bar area only.

yesterday peru became the 40th country to deposit an instrument of ratification with the UN. yes, i’m talkin’ about the FCTC. we did it!

i found out in the middle of health law & ethics last night, prompted to check the treaty site when prof. public health made a comment about “if it ever gets enough signatures…”

naturally, i couldn’t contain my excitement, so i blurted out, “no, in ninety days!”

give american tobacco companies a shot!

it’s bad enough that thousands of american wwii vets are dying from lung cancer because the u.s. government promoted smoking among the troops. now this. *sigh*

i love how smokers seem to think that the signs on every entrance to this school that prohibit smoking in the vicinity of the entrances contain a rain exception clause.

it’s been raining most of the afternoon. the stairwells and much of the first floor reek of cigarettes. thanks, guys.

(y’know, it’s days like this that make me think smokers deserve whatever ailments they get from their habit. addiction, my ass. they’re just assholes.)

over at the conspiracy, juan non-volokh makes mention of the cato/acs FDA regulation debate that has leaked into the blogosphere. i figured, what the hey, i’d weigh in. i’m passingly familiar with both sides — my former employer is one of the major groups supporting FDA jurisdiction over tobacco, and several years ago i attended a pool party at robert levy’s house.

referring to the supreme court decision finding that congress had not intended to give the FDA oversight over tobacco products, levy writes,

Instead of inquiring whether Congress intended to give the FDA jurisdiction over tobacco, the court might have tackled this more vital issue: May Congress constitutionally assign its legislative role to an executive agency?

i would find it rather odd for the supremes to tackle this question and answer it in the negative, as it seems mr. levy would like them to do — mainly because it would unravel most existing government regulation, and because i think it’s physically impossible for congress to tackle all the regulatory issues on its own. one could argue that the agencies could come under congressional pervue rather than the executive’s, and i don’t really have a problem with that. but the regulatory agencies have a role to play in our government, regardless of which branch houses them.

Consider the influential “Wade” balancing test in products liability law, which asks that liability for injury be determined by weighing the following factors:

1. The usefulness and desirability of the product-its utility to the user and to the public as a whole;

do cigarettes have usefulness? for the nicotine addict, they do — they provide his nicotine fix. are they desirable? the tobacco industry has certainly tried to make them look so; you don’t need to go further than the nearest virginia slims or lucky strike ad to know that. but what about to the public as a whole? useful? desirable? probably not — unless you start adding in the salaries of those employed by the tobacco industry, including paper manufacturers, advertising designers, the subsidization of magazine costs, etc. but do you weigh that against the direct and indirect health costs? hospitalization, lost work hours, premature death, and so on and so forth.

*sigh*

my background is in public health. academically, socially, upbringingly, you name it. i was brought up with discussions of contraceptive technology and statistical models at the dinner table. i’m the only kid i know who got the broad street pump as a bedtime mystery story. i gave my first sex ed talk in the fifth grade. and for the last seven years, i’ve been working for what is increasingly being known as the “anti-smoking industry.”

last fall i started law school. and now i increasingly find my fairly totalitarian public health views at odds with my legal and political notions of individual liberty and the proper role of government and regulations in our lives.

not to mention the part of me that’s always felt, “if they’re stupid enough to start smoking….”

Parts excerpted from Anchorage Daily News, November 26, 2003

HOMER, AK — A local businessman who had just finished testifying against a proposed smokefree ordinance collapsed with a heart attack in the council chambers and could not be revived.

Robert Keys, a former smoker, told a packed city council meeting that he sat at a table of smokers every morning for coffee and conversation at a local restaurant without trouble. “It hasn’t bothered my health any,” Keys testified. In fact Keys, a veteran, said he’d just had an echocardiogram about six weeks ago at the hospital at Elmendorf Air Force Base. “They told me I had the heart of a very young person. So I think all this baloney about tobacco smoke affecting people’s health is just that. Baloney.”

Keys returned to his seat in the council chambers. Less than five minutes later, gasping noises from Keys interrupted further testimony. The room was cleared and emergency help summoned.

Among those at the meeting were the city fire chief, head EMT, and a doctor. Attempts to resuscitate Keys en route to the hospital were unsuccessful. He was pronounced dead of cardiac arrest in the emergency room at South Peninsula Hospital, Homer Fire Chief Bob Painter said.

The council meeting was recessed until next week.

Keys told the council he had started smoking when he was 8 and quit when he was 35. Keys was active in local government affairs. Several years ago, he ran unsuccessfully for the city council.

“Bob actively voiced his concerns for city government over the years. He was strong in his beliefs,” said Mayor Jack Cushing, who was chairing the meeting.

The council recessed Monday before it ever got around to introducing the controversial smokefree ordinance. Cushing estimated that at least 30 people had come to testify about the measure. It is scheduled to be taken up with other council business when the meeting resumes on Monday.

“It’s a shocking, horrible tragedy,” said Annette Marley, who attended Monday’s meeting for the Homer Alliance for Fresh Air. “We can’t make a causal relationship between his being around smokers and his death, but we know you have a 30 percent higher risk of dying of chronic heart disease if you’re a nonsmoker exposed to smoke in the workplace.”