HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-10-16 Correspondence Is It Legal To Use Nicotine In Public?
Is it true that because cigarettes are currently sold over the counter they can be used in
public?
Cars are also sold over the counter. But you cannot drive a car in public without a valid
license. Legality of purchase does NOT equal legality of public use.
Nicotine is a restricted insecticide. To purchase and use nicotine, a person has to take and
pass a test and obtain a Certified Applicator's License.
Every 'user' who 'operates without a license' is violating a Federal Regulation.
Anyone using nicotine in public WITHOUT a Certified Applicator's License is doing the
equivalent of driving without a license.
So why are people not arrested for smoking? Because HARDLY ANYONE KNOWS that
the chemical nicotine is the active ingredient of a restricted insecticide, banned from
use by all people except licensed applicators, who are ONLY allowed to use the
Nicotine Smoke Generator in greenhouses where ORNAMENTAL PLANTS
ONLY are grown--no food plants.
The tobacco companies have done the equivalent of producing cars but calling them
"personal transporters" and using that euphemism to circumvent the need for a
license. A car is still a car~ no matter what you call it, and nicotine is still nicotine,
no matter what package you put it in, and both cars and nicotine require licenses for
use, and are to be used only as directed by law. Cars can only be driven by
licensed drivers, and only within the rules laid down by law. Nicotine can only be
purchased and used by licensed pesticide applicators, and only in greenhouses
where no food plants are grown. Anything else is a violation of Federal
Regulations.
Martha Rosett Lutz
302 Richards Street
Iowa City IA 52246
lutzrun @ avalon. net
337-7967
SEARCH SUMMARY.
Date of Search: 04/26/01
Number of Products Selected: 3
State Data
Ingredient:
NICOTINE
Output: BASIC Data + ALL Sites
Page 1 26-APR-2001 08:46:42.9
SHOTGUN RABBIT & DOG REPELLENT RTU (DISCONTINUED 2ND YEAR)
EPA REG NO: 16-128-4 IA REG NO: 2001005355 IA REG YEAR: 2000
FEDERAL STATUS: ACTIVE
REGISTRANT: BONIDE PRODUCTS INC.
2 WURZ AVENUE
YORKVILLE NY 13495
RABBIT & DOG REPELLENT GRANT'S REPELS ANIMALS (DISCONTINEUD 2ND
YEAR)
EPA REG NO: 16-128-1663 IA REG NO: 2001006231 IA REG YEAR: 2000
REGISTRANT: GRANT LABORATORIES, INC
C/O REGISTRAT. BY DESIGN, INC.
118 1/2 E. MAIN ST., SUITE 1
SALEM VA 24153
RABBIT & DOG GRANTS ANIMAL REPELLENT
EPA REG NO: 16-128-1663 IA REG NO: 2001008853 IA REG YEAR: 2001
REGISTRANT: GRANT LABORATORIES, INC
C/O REGISTRAT. BY DESIGN, INC.
118 1/2 E. MAIN ST., SUITE 1
SALEM VA 24153
FORMULATION: DUST
SIGNAL WORD: CAUTION . '
TYPES: UNCLASSIFIED
CONDITIONALLY REGISTERED: SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR - FIFRA ~' ,~,~,'~-~.
3(c)7(A)
REPELLENT, VERTEBRATES
PERCENT ACTIVE INGREDIENT
15.0000 Dried blood (611)
15.0000 Naphthalene (55801)
00.3500 Nicotine (56702)
USES
ORNAMENTAL FLOWER GARDEN PLANTS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL PLANTS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL LAWNS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL TREES (SOIL TREATMENT)
DOMESTIC DWELLINGS (OUTDOOR)
PAVED AREAS (SOIL TREATMENT)
**** END OF DATA FOR THIS PRODUCT ****
F&B RABBIT & DOG CHASER
EPA REG NO: 779-29 IA REG NO: 2001010439 IA REG YEAR: 2001
FEDERAL STATUS: ACTIVE
REGISTRANT: FAESY & BESTHOFF INC.
143 RIVER ROAD
EDGEWATER NJ 07020
FAESY & BESTHOFE RABBIT/DOG CHASER
EPA REG NO: 779-29 IA REG NO: 2001000414 IA REG YEAR: 2000
REGISTRANT: FAESY & BESTHOFF INC.
143 RIVER ROAD
EDGEWATER NJ 07020
REPEL ANIMAL REPELLENT
EPA REG NO: 779-29-270 IA REG NO: 2001004574 IA REG YEAR: 2000
REGISTRANT: FARNAM COMPANIES INC.
301 WEST OSBORN ROAD
PHOENIX AZ 85013
REPEL PET & STRAY REPELLENT
EPA REG NO: 779-29-270 IA REG NO: 2001004469 IA REG YEAR: 2000
REGISTRANT: FARNAM COMPANIES INC.
301 WEST OSBORN ROAD
PHOENIX AZ 85013
FORMULATION: DUST
SIGNAL WORD: CAUTION
TYPES: UNCLASSIFIED
REPELLENT, VERTEBRATES
BIOLOGICAL AGENT, HERBICIDE
PERCENT ACTIVE INGREDIENT
15.0000 Dried blood (611)
15.0000 Naphthalene (55801)
00.3500 Nicotine (56702)
USES
ORNAMENTAL FLOWERING PLANTS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL GARDEN PLANTS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL PLANTS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL LAWNS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS (SOIL TREATMENT)
ORNAMENTAL TREES (SOIL TREATMENT)
PAVED AREAS
**** END OF DATA FOR THIS PRODUCT ****
NICOTINE SMOKE GENERATOR ~
EPA REG NO: 8241-9 IA REG NO: 2001002388 IA REG YEAR: 2001
FEDERAL STATUS: ACTIVE
REGISTRANT: PLANT PRODUCTS CORPORATION P. O. BOX 1149
VERO BEACH FL 32961
FORMULATION: IMPREGNATED MATERIALS
SIGNAL WORD: DANGER
TYPES: RESTRICTED
CONDITIONALLY REGISTERED: SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR - FIFRA
3(c)7(A)
INSECTICIDE AND MITICIDE
PERCENT ACTIVE INGREDIENT
14.0000 Nicotine (56702)
USES
ORNAMENTAL PLANTS (GREENDOUSE-FUMIGATION)
**** END OF DATA FOR THIS PRODUCT ****
(c) Copyright 2001 Purdue Research Foundation - All Rights Reserved
*** END OF OUTPUT ***
*** END OF OUTPUT. Tum off your PC capture and press ENTER to continue.
EPA CODE :056702 REVISION DATE :08/01/94
CHEMICAL :NICOTINE PM :32
CAS NUMBER :54-11-5
Ld~ ~ PRODUCTION DATE :10/31/81
CHANNEL OF TRADE :03/31/82
CRITERIA EPA ACTIONS
Acute Inhalation Toxicity, Effects 1.40 CFR 162.31 (FR 1/19/81)
on Aquatic Organisms 2. now cited as 40 CFR 152.170 (53 FR
15986, May 4, 1988)
EPA REG. NO. STATUS PRODUCT NAME
1327-33 CANCELLED Fulex Nicotine Fumigator
1327-41 ACTIVE Fulex Nicotine Fumigator
5887-5 CANCELLED Nico-Fume Smoke-Fumigator
5887-15 CANCELLED Nico-Fume Liquid
8241-7 CANCELLED Nicotine Smoke Generator
8241-9 Nicotine Smoke Generator
8340-41 Agmark 4-Tin Triphenyltin Hydroxide Howable
Fungicide
Emergency First Aid Treatment Guide
for
NICOTINE
(54-11-5)
This guide should not be construed to authorize emergency
personnel to perform the procedures or activities indicated or
implied. Care of persons exposed to toxic chemicals must be
directed by a physician or other recognized authority.
Substance Characteristics:
Pure Form - Colo~ess to pale yellow oily liquid; brown on
exposure to air.
Odor - Slightly fishy odor when warm.
Commercial Forms - 93 to 98% pure liquid; 3 to 5% dust.
Uses - Insecticide, fumigant, veterinary medicine, tanning.
Other Names - Black Leaf 40, Destruxol Orchid Spray; Futemobac;
Nico-dust; Nico-Fume; Ortho N-4 Dust; Ortho N-5 Dust;
(S)-3-( 1 -methyl-2-pyrrolidinyl) pyridine; Tendust.
Personal Protective Equipment: See Chemical Profile Section VIII.
Emergency Life-Support Equipment and Supplies That May Be
Required:
Compressed oxygen, forced-oxygen mask, soap, water, milk,
activated charcoal, saline cathartic or sorbitol, normal saline,
D5W, Ringer's lactate, diazepam, phenytoin, phenobarbital,
atropine.
Signs and Symptoms of Acute Nicotine Exposure:
Warning: Seizures may be rapid in onset. Caution is advised.
Acute exposure to nicotine may result in headache, dizziness,
confusion, agitation, restlessness, lethargy, seizures, and coma.
Victims may experience hypertension (high blood pressure),
tachycardia (rapid heart rate), and tachypnea (rapid
respirations), followed by hypotension (low blood pressure),
bradycardia (slow heart rate), and respiratory depression.
Cardiac arrhythmias may also occur.
NICOTINE
Gastrointestinal effects include nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain
or burning sensation, and diarrhea. Increased salivation,
lacrimation (tearing), and sweating may be noted.
Emergency Life-Support Procedures:
Acute exposure to nicotine may require decontamination and life
support for the victims. Emergency personnel should wear
protective clothing appropriate to the type and degree of
contamination. Air-purifying or supplied-air respiratory
equipment should also be worn, as necessary. Rescue vehicles
should carry supplies such as plastic sheeting and disposable
plastic bags to assist in preventing spread of contamination.
Inhalation Exposure:
1. Move victims to fresh air. Emergency personnel should avoid
self-exposure to nicotine.
2. Evaluate vital signs including pulse and respiratory rate, and
note any trauma. If no pulse is detected, provide CPR. If not
breathing, provide artificial respiration. If breathing is
labored, administer oxygen or other respiratory support.
3. Obtain authorization and/or further instructions from the
local hospital for administration of an antidote or performance
of other invasive procedures.
4. RUSH to a health care facility.
Dermal/Eye Exposure:
1. Remove victims from exposure. Emergency personnel should avoid
self- exposure to nicotine.
2. Evaluate vital signs including pulse and respiratory rate, and
note any trauma. If no pulse is detected, provide CPR. If not
breathing, provide artificial respiration. If breathing is
labored, administer oxygen or other respiratory support.
3. Remove contaminated clothing as soon as possible.
4. If eye exposure has occurred, eyes must be flushed with
lukewarm water for at least 15 minutes.
5. THOROUGHLY wash exposed skin areas with soap and water.
NICOTINE
6. Obtain authorization and/or further instructions from the
local hospital for administration of an antidote or performance
of other invasive procedures.
7. RUSH to a health care facility.
Ingestion Exposure:
1. Evaluate vital signs including pulse and respiratory rate, and
note any trauma. If no pulse is detected, provide CPR. If not
breathing, provide artificial respiration. If breathing is
labored, administer oxygen or other respiratory support.
2. DO NOT induce vomiting or attempt to neutralize!
3. Obtain authorization and/or further instructions from the
local hospital for administration of an antidote or performance
of other invasive procedures.
4. Give the victims water or milk: children up to 1 year old, 125
mL (4 oz or 1/2 cup); children 1 to 12 years old, 200 mL (6 oz or
3/4 cup); adults, 250 mL (8 oz or 1 cup). Water or milk should be
given only if victims are conscious and alert.
5. Activated charcoal may be administered if victims are
conscious and alert. Use 15 to 30 g (1/2 to 1 oz) for children,
50 to 100 g (1-3/4 to 3-1/2 oz) for adults, with 125 to 250 mL
(1/2 to 1 cup) of water.
6. Promote excretion by administering a saline cathartic or
sorbitol to conscious and alert victims. Children require 15 to
30 g (1/2 to 1 oz) of cathartic; 50 to 100 g (1-3/4 to 3-1/2 oz)
is recommended for adults.
7. RUSH to a health care facility.
CAS Registry Number: 54-11-5
EPA CHEMICAL PROFILE
Date: October 31, 1985
Revision: November 30, 1987
CHEMICAL IDENTITY -- NICOTINE
CAS Registry Number: 54-11-5
Synonyms: (-)-3-(1-Methyl-2-Pyrrolidyl)Pyridine; 1-Methyl-2-(3-Pyridyl)
Pyrrolidine; beta-Pyridyl-alpha-N-Methylpyrrolidine; Destmxol Orchid Spray;
EMO-NIK; ENT 3,424; Flux Maag; Fumetobac; L-3-(1-Methyl-2-Pyrrolidyl)Pyridine;
L-Nicotine; Mach-Nic; Niagara PA Dust; Nic-Sal; Nico-Dust; Nico-Fume; Nicocide;
Nicotin; Nicotine Alkaloid; Ortho N-4 Dust; Ortho N-5 Dust; Pyridine,
3-(1-Methyl-2-Pyrrolidinyl)-, (S)-; Pyridine, 3-(Tetrahydro-
1-Methylpyrrol-2-yl); Pyrrolidine, 1-Methyl-2-(3-Pyridyl)-; Tendust;
Tetrahydronicotyrine, DL-
Chemical Formula: C10H14N2
Molecular Weight: 162.23
SECTION I -- REGULATORY INFORMATION
CERCLA (SARA) 1986:
Toxicity Value Used for Listing Under Section 302: Not Found
TPQ: 100 (pounds)
RQ: 100 (pounds)
Section 313 Listed (Yes or No): No
SECTION II -- PHYSICAIJCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Physical State: Liquid
Boiling Point: 476.1F, 246.7C at 745 mmHg (*Weast 1979)
Specific Gravity (H20=l): 1.0097 at 20C/4C (*Merck 1983)
Vapor Pressure (mmHg): 1 at 61.8C (Sax 1984, p. 1997)
Melting Point: -110F, -79C (*Weast 1979)
Vapor Density (AIR=l): 5.61 (Sax 1984, p. 1997)
Evaporation Rate (Butyl acetate=l): Not Found
Solubility in Water: Miscible below 60C (*Merck 1983)
Appearance and Odor: Colo~ess to pale yellow, oily liquid (*Merck 1983).
Slight, fishy odor when warm (NIOSHIOSHA 1978, pp. 138-139).
SECTION III -- HEALTH HAZARD DATA
OSHA PEL: TWA 0.5 mg/m3 (*NIOSH/RTECS 1985)
ACGIH TLV: TWA 0.5 mg/m3 (skin) (*ACGIH 1983)
IDLH: 35 mg/m3 (NIOSH/OSHA 1978, p. 138-139)
Other Limits Recommended: Not Found
Routes of Entry: Inhalation: Yes (Sax 1984, p. 1997)
Skin: Yes (Merck 1983, p. 935)
Ingestion: Yes (Sax 1984, p. 1997)
Health Hazards (Acute, Delayed, and Chronic): It is classified as super
toxic. Probable oral lethal dose in humans is less than 5 mg/kg or a taste
(less than 7 drops) for a 70 kg (150 lbs.) person (*Gosselin 1976). It may
be assumed that ingestion of 40-60 mg of nicotine is lethal to humans.
There is fundamental difference between acute toxicity from use of nicotine
as insecticide or from ingestion, and chronic toxicity that may be caused
by prolonged exposure to small doses as occurs in smoking (*Encyc Occupat
Health and Safety 1983). Maternal smoking during pregnancy is associated
with increased risk of spontaneous abortion, low birth weight and ~ ;'f'L,
still-birth (*The Chemical Society 1975). Nicotine was found as a
co-carcinogen in animals (*NRC 1977). t f
Medical Conditions Generally Aggravated by Exposure: Not Found ,t ~
SECTION 1V -- FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD DATA
Flash Point (Method Used): Not Found
Flammablc Limits: Low fire hazard when exposed to heat or flame (Sax
1984, p. 1997)
LEL: 0.75% (Sax 1984, p. 1997)
UEL: 4.0% (Sax 1984, p. 1997)
Extinguishing Methods: Extinguish with alcohol foam, dry chemical, or
carbon dioxide (Sax 1984, p. 1997). Water may cause frothing if it gets
below surface of liquid and turns to steam. However, water fog gently
applied to surface will cause frothing which will extinguish the fire
(*NFPA 1978).
Special Fire Fighting Procedures: Material too dangerous to health to
expose firefighters. A few whiffs of the vapor could cause death; vapor or
liquid could be fatal on penetrating ~re~ghter's normal full protective
clothing. Normal full protective clothing and breathing apparatus
available to the average fire department will not provide adequate
protection against inhalation or skin contact (*NFPA 1978).
Unusual Fire and Explosion Hazards: There is a moderate explosion hazard
when exposed to heat or tiame (Sax 1984, p. 1997).
NFPA Flammability Rating: 1
SECTION V -- REACTIVITY DATA
Stability: Unstable:
Stable: Yes (normal conditions) (*NFPA 1978)
Conditions to Avoid: Heat or flames (*Sax 1975)
Incompatibility (Materials to Avoid): Avoid oxidizing materials (Sax
1984, p. 1997).
Hazardous Decomposition or Byproducts: When heated to decomposition, it
emits nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and other highly toxic fumes (Sax
1984, p. 1997).
Hazardous Polymerization: May Occur: Not Found May Not Occur: Not Found
Conditions to Avoid: Not Found
SECTION VI -- USE INFORMATION
It is used as an insecticide, fumigant and in veterinary matters as an
ectoparasiticide and anthelmintic (*Merck 1983). Also, used in tanning
(*NRC 1977).
SECTION VII -- PRECAUTIONS FOR SAFE HANDLING AND USE
(Steps to be Taken in Case Material is Released or Spilled)
The normal full protective clothing and breathing apparatus available to
the average fire department will not provide adequate protection against
inhalation or skin contact with this material (*NFPA 1978). Do not touch
spilled material; stop leak; reduce vapors with water spray. Small Spills:
take up with sand or other noncombustible absorbent material and place
into containers for later disposal. Small Dry Spills: with clean shovel
place material into clean, dry container and cover; move containers from
spill area. Large Spills: dike far ahead of spill for later disposal (DOT
1984, Guide 55).
SECTION VIII -- PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT FOR EMERGENCY SITUATIONS
For emergency situations, wear a positive pressure, pressure-demand,
full facepiece self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) or pressure-
demand supplied air respirator with escape SCBA and a fully-encapsulating,
chemical resistant suit. See the introductory information section at the
beginning of the profiles for additional information.
SECTION IX -- EMERGENCY TREATMENT INFORMATION
See Emergency First Aid Treatment Guide
Page 7A · Editorial Board: · To contact us:
Michael Beck, president and publisher Opinion editor Chuck
Monday, Chuck Baldwin, opinion editor Baldwin
Nov, 13, Daniel W. Brown, market development director Phone: 337-3181, ext.
678
Tricia Birt, assignment editor E-mall: cbaldwin@pres~
2000 Cheryl L. Taylor, inside sales executive citizen,corn
Lucille Hernandez Gregory, community member Fax: 834-1083
What chemicals should we ban?
· It is the dose tlmt The right dose differentjates helps provide pempective. tiny oral dose (much less
makes thepo/son. aP°is°n and aremedY'We [~lr~hl LlltZ DDT, an insecticide, is at than ateaspoon) ldlls rapid-
pay inadvertent homage to the more toxic end of the ly by convulsions and respi-
The Press-Citize~ print- his wisdom when we read continuum. It has been ratory paralysis. Low-dose
ed a leller by Stephart Arndt the dosage guidelines on a Guest Opinion b~ from public use. chronic exposure by inhala-
recently, pointing out that bottle of ~2~lenol before tak- Malalhion, another insecti- tion of this chemical can kill
alcohol, likesmoldng, iscon- ing it ourselves or giviltg it to cide, is towards the other in the long term by causing
sidered responsible for ourcldldren. apoison. Tylenolisapoison. end of the conth~uum, mxdks cancer, lung disease, and
many deaths. He believes Both alcohol and nicotine Strychnine is also a poison, sold over the counter. many other pathological
that there is no need to bm~ are poisons. 171fly-five raft- but unlike alcohol, nicotine, Tylenol is far less toxic conditions.
smoking, and asks an excel- ligran~s of nicotine per kilo- salt and Tylenol, strychnine than malathion, and there- We have banned slxych-
h~t philosophical question: ,"~un of body weight can kill is not sold for public use. fore far beyond it towards nine and DDT from public
"So, shotrid we ban alcohol a htm~an. A cigarette may What distinguishes strych- file less toxic end of the con- use due to their toxicity. We
in restaamnts?" cont3:m up to 30 raiiligrams nine from Tylenol is that tinuunt Table salt is also banned lead-based paint
His apparent implication of nicotine. On the basis of a they are at opposite ends of much less toxjc than because chronic low-dose
ks that since alcohol is not lethal dose for humans, alco- along continuum wlth high- malathion, and surprisingly exposure is cumulatively
banned in restaurants, hol is approximately 1,000 ly toxic substances at one it is more toxic than alcohol very toxic. We have not
smoking should not be times less toxic than nico- end and relatively benign -- however, I suspect that banned salt, alcohol or
banned either. I tlmxtk the tine. substances at the other end. people are more likely to Tylenol because they have
Press-Citizen and Mr. Arndt Another point is that A high enough dose of drink a quar~ of alcohol than relatively low toxicity,
for providing me with m~ when customers di:mk alco- atmost anything wHl kill you, to eat several tablespoons of although long-term effects of
opportunity to answer his hol h~ a restaurant, the alco- but "high enough" is a rela- pure salt. We haven't bam~ed chronic exposure are con-
question and share my edu- hol does not enter the blood- tive term. Even water can alcohol. Let's not ban salt, cerns for alcohol and
cation as I attempt to clarify stre3m of other customers. cause death by hyponatrem- either. 3ylenoL
this issue. My background When customers smoke i3, but very few people drink Nicotine, a natural plant Nicotine Ires been com-
includes extensive training tobacco in a restaurant, all enough water to die that chemical, is the active ingre- pletely banned f~om public
in entomology and botany, the other customers way. Let's not ban water, dient of insecticides that use as an insecticide, even3t
as Well as general biolog~. inevitably get a dose of nico- OK? What should we ban, have been banned from pub- very low doses, due to its
Essentially, Mr. Arndt's finein their bloodstream-- based on its toxicity? lic use due to exl~eme toxic- extreme acute and clwonic
question is: Why ~hottld we unless they cease to breathe Somewhere on the con- ity. It is much more toxic toxicity
ban chemical B ff we do not and eat. ljnuum of chemical poisons, th3n DDT. It is also the active Alcohol and nicotine.
ban chemical X? This is an ShoUld nicotine be there is .la' dividing area ingredient in cigarettes, Two chemicals. Which
excellent question, and Ires a banned from public use, between chemicals that are which are considered recre- should we allow to be used
logical answer that dates even though alcohol is not? considered safe enough for ational drags and are there- in public? Remember. It is
back to Paracelsus (1493- This is a philosophical ques- public use and chemicals fore not subject to the regu- the dose that makes the poi-
1541). He said: "All sub- tion related to what that are too toxic for public latiotts governing pes~cide son.
stances are poisons; them is Paracelsus said. use. Putting a few common use. Nicotine is only slightly Martim Rosett Lutz lives
none which is not a poison. Co~sider this: table salt is chemicals on the continutm~ less toxic than strychnine. A in Iowa City.
Other laW :, are b'aSis: for ,:smoking bans
smoking bans, some argue that: ~greenhouses. It is 14 percent ', ~ public smoki~ js illegal. It is,
cities have no right to pass' ' > nicotine, 'and se deadly that ! · effectively,' urdicensed
one. Yet, nicotine is already i you can't buy or use the fumigation with ~0 mil~
r~gulated by the government at ' "'nicOtine sr~Bke ~g'enerainr" ' of nicotine per cigarette. Also,
both state and national levels. '~:~thont a license. After you do, ~ when smoke gets on your food,
The government's right to ,, , .you aren't suplx~ed to re-enter t ,you eat the nicotine. The
control hnTnrdoUs substances ' the building' for at least 1~ :' ~ z: ' '~ver~_~.e'lethal dose is 40 to 60
(for e~nple: lead, 'asbestos and 'hodrs. What's the difference' !'i~ !,:~'_L the equivalent of
arsenic) is undeniable. between the smoking section of eating two cigarettes.
Nicotine, like heavy metals, a restaurant and a "uicotine ~ The government controls
is ,a poison. It has two legal sTn0k~, generator"? poisons to protect the pubnc.
uses in Iowa: as an animal- ~ T~.e part of our government When we ask that smoking be
repellent dust, and as a smoke. concerned with'our health has banned in restaurants, we are
Following federal guidelines, regulated exposure as well. not.denying personal fi'esdoms.
the repellent contains only OSHA has set acceptable '' We merely ask that businesses
0.35 percent nicotine by weight, nicotine exposur~ at only 10" follow pre-existing government
but there are warnings on ti?e times the allowed lead and regulalious. It's not just a good
box not to use it near a arsenic levels. But that's just idea, after all. It's the law.
vegetable garden. for skin contact; permissible Richard J. Lutz
The smoke is a pesticicle inhalation and ingestion levels Iowa City
'b ("'
What js
Recently, the ~ess-Ci~zen printed ~ ~cle quoting restaurant owner G~ Huysman,
who felt that the smo~ng issue "should be about choice," and an opinion by Tim Borch~dt, who
claimed that smo~ng b~s will infringe on our freedom.
Freedom, according to Webster, is "the power to deter~ne action without restraint."
However, if we take a careful look at restaurants, and ~1 other places of business, we will find that
there are already a number of res~aints. Do these lessen our freedom? And if so, is it an
acceptable son of loss?
When I worked at a fast-food restaurant during high school, I was ins~cted to follow a
number of government-mandated hygiene roles. The water we washed dishes in and the ovens we
cooked food in needed to be heated above ce~n temperatures. Meat needed to be refrigerated
below ceain temperatures. ~e dining ~ea needed to be kept clean. "Employees must wash
hands before returning to work." These ~e obvious safety precautions, designed to protect the
customers from bacteria and food poisoning.
Lead is a useful mete, having made its way into eve~thing from paint to piping to
gasoline. Mercu~ is also useful, for example in the~ometers. Arsenic, in ve~ small doses, is
used as a ~eatment for leukemia. However, these and other heavy metals ~e heavily restricted in
their use. Why? Because above a ceain amount, they ~e deadly poisons.
Nicotine is classified by the EPA as "super toxic," the ~ghest rating given. It is
comp~able to lead, mercu~ and ~senic. Nicotine is flso si~l~ to these infamous heavy metals
in that long-term exposure ~lls t~ough what toxicologists c~l "c~onic toxicity "--and l~e them,
it is regulated by the government to protect our he~. Nicotine as a pesticide is one of the more
highly controlled substances on the m~ket, and its presence even there has been reduced by recent
refo~s in safety guidelines. It is a "restricted" substance, which requires a license to use.
Am I one of Borch~dt's "~litant anti-smokers"? Definitely. However, I do not claim to
be sm~er than you; only better info~ed. (Feel free to contact CA~ if you want info~ation.)
After ~1, you know the dangers of bacteria. You know the dangers of food poisoning. You know
· e dangers of heavy metes. If we don't compl~n when the government regulates these, why
should we object to regulations on a comp~able toxin?
Somehow, I find it h~d to believe ~at our founding fathers intended to give us ~e
freedom to poison each other. It doesn't feel like much of a loss to have it t~en away.
Smoke ~iggers my asthma, so I'll avoid it whether it's banned or not. However, I would
be happy to allow smokers a choice--E their cig~ettes did not contain a highly toxic che~cal.
But that's what nicotine is.
Several government organizations, including the EPA and OSHA, have regulated nicotine.
Each cig~ette produced and smoked violates government guidelines. Why? Because ~e tobacco
companies ~e wor~ng hard to ensure that we all look the o~er way; that we ~gue about freedom
and choice rather than human lives. Without nicotine, tobacco products would become no~ing
more than a pile of burning leaves (which has also been banned in several urban areas.) Without
nicotine, tobacco products would no longer be addictive. We should stop bickering about whether
the proposed restriction is legal, and instead obey the restrictions ~ready passed by Confess.
I don't he~ the sound of our forefathers rolling over in their graves. I hear tobacco
executives laughing.
In the current debate over smoking in restaurants, one of the major arguments seems to be
whether the city is actually allowed to regulate smoking. I'm a bit confused by this, because
nicotine--the most important part of a cigarette--is already controlled by the US government at
both state and national levels.
The government's right to control hazardous chemicals is undeniable. I'm sure you've all
heard of controls on lead, on asbestos, and the recent controversy over arsenic. As a matter of
fact, the smoking issue recalls a story about soft drinks, of all things.
Everybody has drank a Coke at some point, right? Supposedly, Coca-Cola used to be an
extremely popular drink. It had this special... zing to it. That "zing" was cocaine, and if there's
one thing mild-altering drugs can do, it's getting you hooked on a drink.
But then, they discovered why Coke was so addictive. Or the government started to
regulate cocaine; the story isn't completely clear on this point. At any rate, Coca-Cola still has
extracts from the coca plant; they just remove the cocaine itself.
Nicotine, like cocaine, is a restricted substance. There are two legal uses of the stuff in
Iowa; as a solid dust, and as a smoke. The dust, which can be found in gardening stores, is
designed to be mixed into dirt as an animal repellent. By federal regulation, it contains only 0.35%
nicotine by weight, but there are warnings on the box to use the dust for your flowers, not a
vegetable garden. If you get nicotine in something you eat, it poisons you.
The smoke is a pesticide, designed to fumigate greenhouses. By fumigate, I mean "kill
things in"--after all, you don't want any insects left alive in there to chew on your orchids, right?
The smoke is 14% nicotine, and is considered such a deadly poison that you can't buy or use the
"nicotine smoke generator" without a license. After you do use it, you aren't supposed to go back
into the greenhouse for at least twelve hours. Tell me; what's the difference between the smoking
section of a restaurant and a "nicotine smoke generator"? Has anybody measured the toxin content
of your average cigarette's output?
Of course, the small piece of our government that actually cares about our health has
regulated nicotine exposure levels as well as output. The Occupational Safety and Health
Administration has set acceptable nicotine contact exposure limits at half a milligram per cubic
meter of skin. For reference, this is only ten times the amount allowed for lead and arsenic. But
that's only regarding skin contact: the permissible exposure level for inhalation and ingestion is
zero. In effect, all public smoking, whether in an office building, restaurant, or elsewhere, is
illegal. It is the equivalent of fumigating the premises, unlicensed, with thirty milligrams of
nicotine per cigarette. Also remember that when smoke gets on your food in a restaurant, you eat
the nicotine. The average person is killed by about 40 to 60 milligrams; the equivalent of eating
two cigarettes.
When the government forced Coca-Cola Co. to take cocaine out of its drinks, it was acting
to protect the public. Similarly, when we ask that smoking be banned in restaurants, we are not
arbitrarily denying addicts a stress-release or a personal freedom. We are merely asking that all
businesses, not just large soft-drink corporations, be made to follow pre-existing government
regulations. It's not just a good idea, after all. It's the law.
Richard J. Lutz
302 Richards St
Iowa City 52246
(319) 337-7967
s O- The /eOtt
What would you ~' ·
hke on your
~ Would you spray DDT on your child's food?
Would you let someone else do it?
What about strychnine?
pepper These ~e ~own poisons. DDT has been
I pa~esan
n DDT removed from the m~ket. St~chnine is
strychninea highly restricted poison. We ~ow they
nicotine ~e poisons because we c~ measure their
toxicity.
Toxicity is measured as something called
'LD50.' This refers to the *amount of
poison that will kill 50% of a population.
(The rest of the population will suffer
sub-lethal toxic effects.) Low LD50 val-
ues indicate powerful poison
a little dab'll do you.
*Milligrams of toxin per kilogrant of body weight
~i~'The LD50 of table salt is 3300 ~'The LD50 of DDT is 113
The LD50 of strychnine is 30 ~ The LD50 of nicotine is 55*
C~Which one is safest to allow on your child's food?
.~Which one is banned from public use? ~ What's on the menu?
about ~t ) ,
*Value for rats; human LDS0 is I mg/kg
What's On The Menu?
(Facts about nicotine)
icture this: you are seated in a restaurant, and the people at the next table pull out cans of insecti-
to the user's quality of life. Some people wish to maintain this pest-free quality of life in restaurants. An
average urban housefly carries more than 100,000 bacteria per fly. Some individual flies carry as many as
500 million bacteria. Consider where flies breed and feed: before they arrive at your food, they breed in
dung or carrion, and feed on the same. They wipe their feet on your food, defecate every 4.5 minutes, and
vomit more often than that (Conniff, pp. 9-20). So... go ahead and spray, right? Wrong !
The central issue here is not the right to use an over-the-counter product. The central issue involves
regulations governing use of toxins in public settings.
Restaurants use pesticides to control flies and other pests. Pesticide use is governed by specific
regulations. The kinds and amounts of toxins used, and the time that must elapse before humans can re-
enter the restaurant, are highly regulated. Would restaurants violate these laws by allowing customers to
spray unquantified amounts of toxins into communal airspace?
Some pesticides are relatively benign to humans. Toxicity is usually measured as something called
LD50. This refers to the Lethal Dose (in milligrams of toxin per kilogram of body weight) that kills 50%
of a population. Low numbers indicate high toxicity. Consider these LD50 values:
~ DDT = 113. DDT is no longer sold for public use.
Malathion = 1375. Not very toxic. Available over the counter.
Both DDT and malathion are synthetic. Are natural pesticides safer? About 1200 plant species
produce natural insecticides (Schery, p. 320). Pyrethrin is a natural pesticide, used by the Chinese for 2000
years. You can buy a 15 ounce spray bottle for less than $4.00. The label proclaims that it "May be applied
to edibles up to day of harvest!" The LD50 of pyrethfin is 820; less toxic than DDT, more toxic than
malathion. Pyrethrin content is a minuscule 0.02% of the spray. Would you mind if people at the next table
in a restaurant used dilute pyrethrin spray? Or malathion? Alittle bit of fumigation to kill the flies--that's
al I !
Some local restaurants do allow customers to fumigate with a natural plant insecticide--one of the
most powerful insecticides available in the world today, produced by a plant closely related to Deadly
Nightshade.
The LD50 of nicotine is* 55.
More toxic than DDT, pyrethrin, or malathion. Nicotine is the active ingredient in some of the most
heavily regulated insecticides in the world. You can't stroll into Earl May and buy nicotine insecticides.
Unlike pyrethrin, rotenone (LD50; 132), and other natural plant pesticides available locally, nicotine
insecticides are not sold to the public. A Certified Applicator's License is required for the purchase and use
of nicotine insecticides. This is because of the extreme mammalian toxicity of nicotine.
Martha Rosett Lutz
*This value is based on toxicity to rats. Casarett & Doull's Toxicology 302 Richards Street
text lists the LD50 of nicotine as 1 (one) milligram per kilogram of Iowa City IA 52246
body weight. (319) 337-7967
If you are in a closed room where people are smoking, you might as well be in the same room
during an insecticidal fumigation with a highly toxic, restricted use insecticide. Toxin molecules are car-
ried into the air and enter your body via your lungs. When smoke settles onto your food, the toxin also
enters via your digestive tract. This is no different than if someone sprayed insecticide in the restaurant
during your meal.
Tobacco plants have a potent natural insecticide, so only a few kinds of insects eat them. Genetic
engineering provides a cheap and effective control method for those few pests. Transgenic tobacco was
first produced in 1984. Tobacco today may include one or more of the following compounds, produced by
genes transferred from bacteria or from other plant species into tobacco: Bt toxins, proteinase inhibitors,
alpha-amylase inhibitors, and lectins (Panda & Khush, pp. 343-352).
Poisoning with any toxin can be either acute or chronic. Acute effects am immediately evident: eat
your cigarettes instead of smoking them, and the nicotine will kill you rapidly by convulsions and respira-
tory paralysis. A cigarette may contain as much as 30 milligrams of nicotine (Lewis & Lewis, p. 392).
Chronic poisoning does not kill immediately, and may not even cause immediate symptoms. Fa-
miliar examples of chronic poisoning are long-term exposure to low doses of lead or radon. If you walk
into a house with radon in the air you do not instantly drop dead. Over time, chronic exposure to this toxin
will cause damage that your body does not have time to repair before more damage occurs. This gradual
build-up of toxins in blood and tissues may not provoke detectable damage for years. The damage may be
irreversible by the time it is detected. The same kind of long-term chronic poisoning can result from
exposure to low doses of nicotine, as well as other insecticides.
Both malathion and nicotine can have acute and chronic effects on humans. The difference is that
you would have to eat or inhale 25 times as much malathion as nicotine to suffer toxic effects. Nicotine is
a nerve poison, and also damages DNA and the immune system in ways that increase the risk of develop-
ing cancer.
If you patronize restaurants that allow smoking, you are inhaling frequent small doses of what my
medical botany text calls "one of the most physiologically damaging substances used by man." (Lewis &
Elvin-Lewis, p. 388.) These businesses may feel they am protecting "smoker's rights," but at what price to
their employees and to nonsmoking customers? Allowing people to be present in a room where an insec-
ticidal fumigation is taking place is a bad decision, and nicotine is a poor choice of poison because of its
extreme mammalian toxicity. We would all be better off with malathion.
References
Conniff, R. 1996. Spineless Wonders. Henry Holt & Co. 222 pp.
Khush, G. S., and N. Panda. 1995. Host Plant Resistance To Insects. CAB International & IRRI. 431 pp.
Lewis, W. H. and M. P. F. Elvin-Lewis. 1977. Medical Botany. John Wiley & Sons. 515 pp.
Schery, R.W. 1972. Plants For Man. Prentice-Hall, Inc. 657 pp.
Martha Rosett Lutz
302 Richards Street
Iowa City IA 52246
(319) 337-7967
Klaassen, Curtis D., ed. 1996. Casarett & Doull's Toxicology: the basic science of poisons. Fifth
Edition. McGraw-Hill, Health Professions Division. NY. 1111 pp.
Page 480:
"Acute overdose of nicotine has occurred in children who accidentally ingest tobacco products, in
tobacco workers exposed to wet tobacco leaves (Gehlbach et at., 1974), or workers exposed to nicotine-
containing pesticides."
· .. chronic exposure to nicotine has effects on the developing fetus. Along with decreased birth
weights, attention deficit disorders are more common in children whose mothers smoke cigarettes during
pregnancy, and nicotine has been shown to lead to analogous neurobehavioral abnormalities in animals
exposed prenatally to nicotine (Lichensteiger et al., 1988)."
· .. prenatal exposure to nicotine alters the development of nicotinic receptors in the CNS (Van de
Kamp and Collins, 1994), changes that may be related to subsequent attention and cognitive disorders in
animals and children."
Page 669:
"Nicotine is extremely toxic, the acute oral LD50 in rats being on the order of 50 to 60 mg/kg. It is
readily absorbed through the skin, and any contact with nicotine solutions should be washed off immedi-
ately." One possible consequence is "death from paralysis of the respiratory muscles via blockade of the
neuromuscular junctions."
"Nicotine comprises some 97 percent of the alkaloid content of commercial tobacco."
Page 1038:
The only permissible exposure level of nicotine is 0.5 milligrams, skin contact only; there is no permis-
sible level for inhalation or ingestion. (OSHA)
Martha Rosett Lutz
302 Richards Street
Iowa City IA 52246
(319) 337-7967
Page 1 of l
Marian Karr
From: SLWestcott@aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 1:12 PM
To: council@iowa-city,org
Subject: Smoking Issue
I see by this mornings paper you are going to debate the smoking issue again. Let me put my two cents worth in on this
issue. I heard several of you say you wouldn't let special interest groups rule you. Well, you are doing just that if you let
this CAFE group get their way. You are stepping into the private business territory by telling business owners what they
can and can not do. Who are you to take any freedom away from anyone. Remember smoking is not illegal. Are you
going to tell all the adults and senior citizens who smoke ,that they will not be able to go for coffee with friends and have a
smoke in any restaurant. That they will have to go to a bar to smoke???? You know you are just going to give Coralville
more business if you impose a ban on smoking in restaurants. And think about all the people that visit our city for sports
and etc. You will be forcing them to Coralville to eat and spend their money. Let the private business man decide for him
or her self on what they want in their restaurants, If goverment bodies keep taking away our rights, pretty soon we won't
have a freedoms left. By the way, I'm a senior citizen.
SLWestcott
10/15/01
Marjan Karr
From: Bock, Jeanne [JBock@maiLpublic-hea]th.uiowa.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2001 7:34 AM
To: 'council@iowa-city.org'
Subject: tonight's smoking forum
Council:
I had wanted to attend the open forum tonight
To show my support for my vote for the smoking ban in area restaurants.
i'm not able to be there in person,
But know my thoughts.
Am sure you saw the editorial yesterday in the IC Gazette,
From Dr. Rosenberg and all the (9 other) peds doctors at Pediatrics
Associates.
I agree with that letter 100%.
M. Jeanne Bock, RN, CIC
Clinical Services Coordinator
Institute for Quality Healthcare
5229 Westlawn
Iowa City, IA 52242
jeanne-bock~uiowa.edu
Iowa Coordinator
Hidwest AIDS Training & Education Center
319-335-8013 phone
319-335-8814 fax
Check out our web site
www.uihealthcare.com/iqh
Marjan Karr
From: Troester. Joni [joni-troester@uiowa.edu]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 12:52 PM
To: 'council@iowa-city.org'
Subject: smokefree restaurant ordinance
Dear iowa City Councilors,
I am writing to urge you to pass a strong smokefree restaurant ordinance.
I recommend that you make the ordinance straight forward and do not fall
into the trap that Ames did when they passed an ordinance that only applied
during certain times of the day. Red light/green light ordinances are hard
to enforce and not effective in protecting the health of restaurant workers.
Leave the bars until another day.
Sincerely,
Joni Troester.
Oct.15. 2001 8:43AM U[ INSTIT RURAL ENVIRON HLTH N0.4604
Jdmsm
/~owA.~ JOHNSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Ralph Wllmoth, M.P.H,, M.P.A.
'L_ Director
October 11,2CXD1
Iowa City City Council ~ -'\ .~.
City of Iowa City
410 East Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Re: Support of Clean Indoor Air Ordinances to Reduce Exposure to
Secondhand Smoke
Dear Members of the Council:
Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is the third leading cause
of preventable death in the United States. In fact, there is no safe level of
exposure to tobacco smoke. The U.S. Surgeon General has concluded
secondhand smoke "is a cause of disease, including lung cancer, in
healthy non-smokers." Studies have shown childhood exposure to
secondhand smoke increases risk of developing cancer as an adult.
Passage ot ordinances that suppod smoke-free environments protect
employees, children, and others from exposure to secondhand smoke.
At its regular meetir~g on October 10, 2001, The Johnson County Board ot
Health discussed the Clean Air for Everyone (C.A.F. EL) group's request to
suppod a smoke-free ordinance for restaurants. Upon proper motion, the
Board of Health approved a letter suppoding effods to suppod smoke flee
environments. Thank you.
Copy: Members, Board of Health
Members, Clear Air for Everyone
Page ] of 1
Marian Karr
From: Emil Rinderspacher [rindys3@home.com]
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 4:44 PM
To: council@iowa-city.org
Subject: Community Health
As a mother and a family physician, I urge the Iowa City Council to protect the members of our community from the
deleterious effects of second-hand cigarette smoke. The risks to all from this exposure were eloquently detailed by Dr.
Herman Hein in his recent Press-Citizen commentary and do not need repeating. Please protect the health of our
community, a legitimate task of government, by passing a strong ordinance banning smoking in public places such as
restaurants.
Susan Goodnet, M.D.
1 O/15/0 1
October 11, 2001
Iowa City City Council
Civic Center
410 E. Washington Street
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear City Council Members:
I am writing to show my support for the clean air act for Iowa City's restaurants. I know
that there are problems from second hand smoke, even when people are exposed for a
little bit. As a mother, I am concerned for the well-being of my family when we are at
restaurants. As a public health professional, I am concemed for the well-being of our
community members.
I have lived in a state that was smoke-free and recently visited another. How refreshing it
is to go to restaurants where my rights as a non-smoker are not superseded by the rights
of smokers. I urge you to make smoke-free restaurants a reality for the people of Iowa
City.
Sincerely,
Canna L. Bylund, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Community and Behavinral Health
Department of Communication Studies
121 BCSB
Iowa City, IA 52242