LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
February 21, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     barack obama     iran     greece     gay marriage     congress     colbert report
Most Read

Acts of Love

Fearful GOP May Hope for a Brokered Convention

Ideological Hypocrites

Bill Moyers: Attack Ads Inside and Out

Santorum Staffer Links Obama, Islam Via 'Slip'

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Acts of Love
Ideological Hypocrites
The Lowdown on Fracking

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Déjà Pooh

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Scientists Uncover New Risk Associated With Thirdhand Smoke

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Feb 9, 2010
cigarette smoking
Flickr/adi&moni

If anyone needs another reason to stop smoking, here it is: Researchers are turning their attention to the effects of “thirdhand smoke,” the layer of icky residue that lingers on clothes and in living spaces after cigarettes and other tobacco delivery devices are snubbed out. Scientists at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory now have found a potential health risk associated with thirdhand smoke and a common household pollutant.  —KA

San Jose Mercury News:

The scientists, however, are the first to find that nitrous acid, an indoor air pollutant created by gas appliances, vehicle engines and tobacco smoke, reacts with nicotine found on surfaces.

“We want to make people aware that there’s a potential hazard from thirdhand smoke that has not been recognized before,” said Lara Gundel, one of the authors of the study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“This is a new finding that a common pollutant can react with nicotine to form carcinogens right in our own homes,” said Gundel, who works in the lab’s Indoor Environment Department.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By harleyrider1978, February 10, 2010 at 6:14 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Just a little bit more about the N’-nitrosonornicotine found in SHS/ETS.

“Thus, non-smokers can be exposed to highly carcinogenic TSNA.”

However, the dose makes the poison!!

This stuff is NOT present in quantities known to be hazardous!!!

The concentration of N’-nitrosonornicotine (NNN) ranged from not detected to 23 pg/l, that of N’-nitrosoanata-bine ranged from not detected to 9 pg/l, while 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK) was detected in concentrations ranging from 1 to 29 pg/l.

NNN = 0 to 23 picograms per liter

NNK = 0 to 29 picograms per liter

1 cubic meter = 1,000 liters

1 nanogram(NG) = 1,000 picograms

Thus, NNN of 0 to 23 picograms per liter is the same as 0 to 23 nanograms(ng) per cubic meter

NNK of 0 to 29 picograms per liter is the same as 0 to 29 nanograms(ng) per cubic meter.

The question is whether or not 0 to 29 nanograms(ng) per cubic meter of a carcinogenic substance is a dangerous level?

The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has concluded that inorganic arsenic is known to be a human carcinogen.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) cites sufficient evidence of a relationship between exposure to arsenic and human cancer. The IARC classification of arsenic is Group 1.

The EPA has determined that inorganic arsenic is a human carcinogen by the inhalation and oral routes, and has assigned it the cancer classification, Group A.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprof…iles/tp2- c6.pdf
6.4.1 Air

Mean arsenic levels in ambient air in the United States have been reported to range from 20 to 30 ng/m3 in urban areas (Davidson et al. 1985; EPA 1982c; IARC 1980; NAS 1977a).

NOTE: 20 to 30 ng/m3 is NOT stated to be a hazardous level of exposure to this known human carcinogen.

Report this
William W. Wexler's avatar

By William W. Wexler, February 10, 2010 at 5:56 am Link to this comment

Well, omygodnotagain,

I don’t dispute anything you said except the first sentence.  The reason I posted in this thread was because John Brown said (below) that “quitting smoking (or avoiding people who smoke) isn’t going to make you healthier.”

I suppose “healthier” could be the pivot point of the argument.  For example, if you have already smoked for 30 years and have lung cancer, I guess quitting is moot.  If you live in San Bernardino, which the residents call “the tailpipe of LA”, I suppose you could mount a “what the hell” defense.

But here in flyover country, the worst we have to deal with is pig shit lagoons.  If you don’t live near one of them, you don’t really notice them, even though once in a while there’s an article by conservationists that there’s pig shit in your drinking water.  But for a murder rate that’s one third that of NYC (around 2 per 100000 vs 6.3) I think that gives you a feeling for the relative stress level.  And we know that stress is a killer.

I was taken by JB’s sweeping generalization about medicine, namely that there’s not one single prescription that doesn’t make us sicker.  Hmmm. He has a point about many of the ‘scripts people take. Just look at all the warnings and disclaimers that come with drugs.  Even so, there are drugs that save people’s lives.  Just 100 years ago you could die from an ingrown toenail or abscessed tooth if you got an infection.  Antibiotics have been a blessing, saving many millions of lives, even though some of them may be extremely dangerous.  A few years ago I was on high doses of Levaquin for 6 weeks and I believe that using that drug that way for pneumonia led to a chronic health problem I live with today.  Tell you the truth, I think the pneumonia might have gone away on its own if I would have been able to just stop going to work for a month and stayed home to rest. 

Here in Iowa we have the best possible combination, I think. It’s an idyllic setting (listen to Dvorak’s New World Symphony), modern medicine, low crime rates, very high appreciation for education and the arts.  It’s not a bad place to park your arse while you wait to die, which we’re all going to do no matter what.  I’ll take a little bit of pig shit in my water, I guess. I can just replace the filter in my Brita pitcher every other week instead of once a month.

-Wexler

Report this
Volma's avatar

By Volma, February 10, 2010 at 5:33 am Link to this comment

I just thought of a some more not really news news subjects that would be more interesting than the formula still used today…I would like to know who thought up this No news category, used to divert attention to the millions and millions of little things that anyone with common sense already knows, and has since time began…When I see the title “Scientists Uncover New Risks” I avoid cringe, feel disgusted, tired of the constant negativity layed on all of us daily…A person is better off, really if they stay away from the news…Scientist Uncover startling facts that the news bites Scientists put out, are mostly manipulative propaganda, which serves another purpose to keep people in fear, paranoid, defensive and uppity in general, can cause death injury depression and general paranoia and defeat, which leads to death by all things…Scientist’s discover that life is out to kill you…Evidence proves that once you are born, you will die, OMG Who started this crap? When will it end????I don’t need no stinking scientist to waste money and time, my time on something that anyone with common sense knows….I live in a suburban area, with way too many cars passing my house daily…This use to be the country, and I choke, cough, get asthma attacks, and can actually smell the stench from the air pollution outside my door and windows…Am better off not opening the windows, this is bad and combined with the noise of people going 45 50mph rushing home to watch TV?. in a 35mph zone that should be 20 to 25 MPH is hazardous to my health…

Report this

By omygodnotagain, February 9, 2010 at 9:55 pm Link to this comment

Wexler
No one disputes that smoking is harmful to the person that smokes. But in context so are ‘everyday’ pollutants. A non smoker living in New York is exposed to much higher levels of pollutants, breathed 24/7. 20% of ALL lung cancers cases are non smokers. When the rising lung cancer rates were first noticed epidemological studies were undertaken,(meaning statistical studies of populations)  but they could never dissociate industrial pollution, because cars and factories had already polluted the air, and everyone by virtue of living in an industrial society was exposed. What the powers that be do not want are studies done on industrial pollution.This is the junk science necessary to cover that. The next time a semi trailer is stuck in traffic in front of you, watch the black plume of particulate smoke that it pushes out and ask yourself, a cigarette puts out 1 microgram of tar how many did that semi just push out into your face..take a look at your car engine or exhaust pipe and see the soot for yourself..its why we have catalytic converters, the NOx road tests.

Report this
William W. Wexler's avatar

By William W. Wexler, February 9, 2010 at 7:02 pm Link to this comment

Well, John Brown,

I don’t disagree with your argument about dangers in our food and medicine.  However, your statement that quitting smoking isn’t going to make you healthier is just wrong.

I don’t know if you were using ironic hyperbole to buttress your point, but the plain fact is that if you quit smoking you will begin to get healthier.  Immediately.

The continuous bombardment of carbon monoxide, nicotine, and other products in the smoke raises hell with your cardiopulmonary system.  It constricts your blood vessels, raises your pulse rate, decreases the available red blood cells that can carry oxygen, puts crap into your lungs that you have to cough up, just for starters.

If I hadn’t quit smoking in ‘91 I would be dead now, and that’s just the truth.  So, I guess that in itself sorta blows your argument that quitting smoking won’t help you out of the water.

-Wexler

PS BTW, I quit using the patch.  I quit once about 10 years earlier cold turkey, and the patch was much more comfortable.  The gum… forget it. It is too much like smoking (putting something in your mouth that tastes like an ashtray and is your source of nicotine). I’ve known people who got hooked on the gum and chewed it (while sneaking a smoke once in a while) for years.

Report this

By liecatcher, February 9, 2010 at 6:27 pm Link to this comment

SCIENTISTS UNCOVER NEW RISK ASSOCIATED WITH THIRDHAND
SMOKE

To bad they haven’t uncovered the risks of nicotine in a bottle designed to addict children & keep current addicts in the loop.

Googling Nicotine in a bottle: can make you sick.

Results 1 - 10 of about 448,000 for Nicotine in a
bottle. (0.17 seconds)

Report this

By harleyrider1978, February 9, 2010 at 5:35 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This study appears to be wall to wall junk science. They seem to be most worried about “carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines or TSNAs..several hundred nanograms per square meter of nitrosamines” (1)

Guess where Nitrosamines are also formed? Cooking fish, where TSNAs are measured in microgrammes, but in the Berkeley paper nanogrammes a factor of a thousand times smaller. (2)

Nitrosamines are also found in ham, milk, children’s balloons and tap water. (3)

Finally the World Health Organization’s cancer mouthpiece the International Agency Research on Cancer says on Nitrosamines: “5.2 Human carcinogenicity data. No data were (sic) available to the Working Group.” (4)

So we have a dose that is so low, cooking a fish produces 1,000 times more “carcinogens” on a chemical which has not been proven to cause cancer in the first place.

Junk science that insults the intelligence.


http://newscenter.lbl.gov/feature-stories/2010/02/08/dangers-of-third-hand-smoke/

http://rms1.agsearch.agropedia.affrc.go.jp/contents/JASI/pdf/society/21-1629.pdf

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/134/8/2011.pdf

http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol89/mono89-7E.pdf

Levels of arsenic in the air generally range from less than 1 to about 2,000 nanograms (1 nanogram equals a billionth of a gram) of arsenic per cubic meter of air (less than 1–2,000 ng/m3), depending on location, weather conditions, and the level of industrial activity in the area. However, urban areas generally have mean arsenic levels in air ranging from 20 to 30 ng/m3.

Both inorganic and organic forms leave your body in your urine. Most of the inorganic arsenic will be gone within several days, although some will remain in your body for several months or even longer. If you are exposed to organic arsenic, most of it will leave your body within several days.

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp2-c1.pdf


The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
has set a permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 10 micrograms
of arsenic per cubic meter of workplace air (10 ?g/m³) for 8
hour shifts and 40 hour work weeks.

so thats 10,000 nanograms per cubic meter of air per 8 hours

1 cig gives 29 nanograms per cubic meter

so we take 10,000 divided by 29 = 186,000 cigs burning simultaneously to meet oshas pel of 10ugs per 8 hour shift in a 20x9x9 sealed room.

cotton contains the same stuff from insecticide spraying,so your clothes and underwear will have this tnsa’s in it too!

Report this

By omygodnotagain, February 9, 2010 at 5:20 pm Link to this comment

What a joke, why don’t they look at the millions of tons of pollutants put out by cars, industry and just about every household product that people have to breathe 24/7

Report this

By erthbot, February 9, 2010 at 1:09 pm Link to this comment

Next, how smoking is destroying parallel dimensions.

Report this

By NYCartist, February 9, 2010 at 12:20 pm Link to this comment

Ask anyone allergic to tobacco.

Report this

By WykydRed, February 9, 2010 at 9:19 am Link to this comment

Well, bullshit “science” is bought and paid for to introduce yet another “spook” story! sigh. It’s true, Americans ARE the stupidest people on earth.

This “third-hand smoke” bullshit was tried in England and shot down by ... gasp! actual science. American Anti-smoking groups put up signs telling people that if they smoke, they cannot go into the maternity wards.

It does NOT exist, and every anti-smoking doctor doing studies in the field for the last 26 years has left the movement they started because…. The Anti-Smokers have left science behind and taken up the Nazi “repeat a lie often enough with enough conviction, people will begin to think it is the truth.”

But, American Evangelical fanatics will take up the battle cry without checking ONE fact, just as they have when they decided to up the number of “things” in cigarette smoke higher and higher because 39 did not sound “dangerous” enough. And, no one mentioned those 39 “things” were measured in 1 to 5 microns, not enough to do anything to anyone.

But keep lying, America. You are stupider than Germans who eventually came to believe the Goebbel’s Mantra. Americans, it is now dead solid fact, only have hear a lie once.

At least England finally gagged on the lies, took the signs down and informed A.S.H. never to try that bullshit again or they would jailed. Here in Amerika, land of the “free and home of the brave”, the stupid are looking for victims of bigotry they can feel proud about treating as less than garbage. Wait till the Black Market get into the concentration camps you come up with to keep the “contaminating smokers” in ...

Watch “V” again. It’s the kind of government you want, and remember, it ends badly for the “righteous”.

Report this

By John Brown, February 9, 2010 at 7:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You’ve got to be kidding! This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read so far
today.

You know what else is bad for you? Pesticides. Is anyone calling for an end to
industrial agriculture? Monsanto (aka Agent Orange) holds a veritable
monopoly on the “safe” poison trade in this country. EVERY PIECE FRUIT AND
VEGETABLE YOU EAT from a standard commercial grocery store is coated in
poison that kills grasshoppers, weevils, aphids, beetles, ragweed, dandelions,
crabgrass, and so on. When small organisms ingest these poisons in small
doses, they perish immediately. When large organisms ingest these poisons in
small doses over the course of an entire lifetime, they perish slowly. Some
people wonder why the USA, with all our fancy medicine and scientific
advancement, has an exponentially higher cancer rate than primitive people
from uncivilized places like the Amazon basin, the high Arctic, and the steppes
of Mongolia. These people have a higher average lifespan than us. They have
the lowest rates of arthritis, diabetes, and cancer on the planet. Yet amazingly,
they don’t have access to Paxil, Celebrex, Avodart, Viagara, Prozac, or Benadryl.
Could it be, perhaps, that they’re healthy because they eat clean food?

What a brilliant idea! Refrain from poisoning your food before you eat it, and
maybe…just maybe…you won’t be prone to chronic pain, thoughts of suicide,
indigestion, trouble sleeping, uncontrollable muscle spasms, nausea, dry
mouth, blurred vision, and erections lasting more than four hours.

Forget about cigarettes and “third-hand smoke.” Quitting smoking (or avoiding
people who do smoke) isn’t going to make you healthier. There are too many
other components of our society that are just as toxic, namely the things that
are supposed to be “good” for us, like food and medicine. There isn’t a single
prescription available to us that doesn’t make us sicker. Inhaling smoke will
just speed up the inevitable.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!






                        Number of characters remaining: 4000

Are you a human? Retype the word you see here.

     

Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.