Loading...
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