Smoking Ban Spurs Drop In Heart Attacks

41 Percent Drop In Hospitalized Cases Reported 3 Years After Pueblo, Colo. Adopts Ban

(AP)  A smoking ban in one Colorado city led to a dramatic drop in heart attack hospitalizations, according to a new study that is considered the best and longest-term research to show such a link.

The rate of hospitalized cases dropped 41 percent three years after the ban of workplace smoking in Pueblo, Colo., took effect. There was no such drop in two neighboring areas, and researchers believe it's a clear sign the ban was responsible.

The study suggests that secondhand smoke may be a terrible and under-recognized cause of heart attack deaths in this country, said one of its authors, Terry Pechacek of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

At least eight earlier studies have linked smoking bans to decreased heart attacks, but none ran as long as three years. Some critics had questioned whether a ban could have such an immediate impact, and suggested other factors could have driven the declines.

The new study looked at heart attack hospitalizations for three years following the July 1, 2003 enactment of Pueblo's ban, and found declines as great or greater than what was seen in the other research.

"This study is very dramatic," said Dr. Michael Thun, a researcher with the American Cancer Society.

"This is now the ninth study, so it is clear that smoke-free laws are one of the most effective and cost-effective to reduce heart attacks," said Thun, who was not involved in the CDC study released Thursday.

Smoking bans are designed not only to cut smoking rates but also to reduce secondhand tobacco smoke. It is a widely recognized cause of lung cancer, but its effect on heart disease can be more immediate. It not only damages the lining of blood vessels, but also increases the kind of blood clotting that leads to heart attacks. Reducing exposure to smoke can quickly cut the risk of clotting, some experts said.

"You remove the final one or two links in the chain" of events leading to a heart attack, Thun said.

Secondhand smoke causes an estimated 46,000 heart disease deaths and about 3,000 lung cancer deaths among nonsmokers each year, according to statistics cited by the CDC.

In the new study, researchers reviewed hospital admissions for heart attacks in Pueblo. Patients were classified by ZIP codes. They then looked at the same data for two nearby areas that did not have bans - the area of Pueblo County outside the city and for El Paso County.

In Pueblo, the rate of heart attacks dropped from 257 per 100,000 people before the ban to 152 per 100,000 in the three years afterward. There were no significant changes in the two other areas.

The study assumed declines in the amount of secondhand smoke in Pueblo buildings after the ban, but did not try to measure that. The researchers also did not sort out which heart attack patients were smokers and which were not, so it's unclear how much of the decline can be attributed to reduced secondhand smoke.

[banthebans]

WOW, and this is a NEWS item???? "The study assumed declines in the amount of secondhand smoke in Pueblo buildings after the ban, but did not try to measure that. The researchers also did not sort out which heart attack patients were smokers and which were not, so it''s unclear how much of the decline can be attributed to reduced secondhand smoke." Did anyone proof this story before it made its way into print? Does any media member EVER examine the "studies" they tout, or do they just print it all as long as the headline supports the anti-smoking zealot''s agenda. To help you out, please read the above quote from your story, ask yourself what this study really did, (nothing will be your answer) and then explain why a "journalist" would print such ***.

[crazybajan]

The last paragraph says it all. Why print this stuff.

[debinok1]

Isn''t it just as likely that healthier diets, better earlier testing and healthier exercise routines could have been just as responsible for the drop. To not include these factors in a study related to health is not only unscientific but downright misleading.

[banthebans]

WOW, and this is a NEWS item???? "The study assumed declines in the amount of secondhand smoke in Pueblo buildings after the ban, but did not try to measure that. The researchers also did not sort out which heart attack patients were smokers and which were not, so it''s unclear how much of the decline can be attributed to reduced secondhand smoke." Did anyone proof this story before it made its way into print? Does any media member EVER examine the "studies" they tout, or do they just print it all as long as the headline supports the anti-smoking zealot''s agenda. To help you out, please read the above quote from your story, ask yourself what this study really did, (nothing will be your answer) and then explain why a "journalist" would print such ***.

[debinok1]

Oh and did I mention DEADLY.
To "assume" that there were no other factors involved in the drop in heart related admissions implies that if a person quits smoking BUT continues a sedentary lifestyle, fat enhanced diet and goes undiagnosed that they will reduce their risk of heart disease is dangerous.

[tcoleman12]

If it is clear that first hand smoke is unhealthy and presumed that second hand smoke is unhealthy, then why not ban cigarettes period? Something that is that harmful should just be outlawed, right?

[clathrate]

Isn''''t it just as likely that healthier diets, better earlier testing and healthier exercise routines could have been just as responsible for the drop. To not include these factors in a study related to health is not only unscientific but downright misleading.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DebinOK1

RIGHT. It''s pure coincidence that the heart attack rate HALVED after the ban was enacted, and of course it''s logical to conclude everyone immediately started eating salads and running marathons as a result. Yep, it had to be the salads, not the smoking ban.

It''s no coincidence that the only people who doubt the findings of the study are those with ZERO technical background.

[shanev137]

Why do we really want millions and millions of people living longer?

[debinok1]

RIGHT. It''''s pure coincidence that the heart attack rate HALVED after the ban was enacted, and of course it''''s logical to conclude everyone immediately started eating salads and running marathons as a result. Yep, it had to be the salads, not the smoking ban.

It''''s no coincidence that the only people who doubt the findings of the study are those with ZERO technical background.

Posted by clathrate
*********************
Did you even bother to read the flipping article?

The last paragraph was most intersting.

"The study assumed declines in the amount of secondhand smoke in Pueblo buildings after the ban, but did not try to measure that. The researchers also did not sort out which heart attack patients were smokers and which were not, so it''s unclear how much of the decline can be attributed to reduced secondhand smoke."

Now please tell me exactly how they were able to come up with the headline:
Smoking Ban Spurs Drop In Heart Attacks
41 Percent Drop In Hospitalized Cases Reported 3 Years After Pueblo, Colo. Adopts Ban

When they do not even know how many admissions were even smokers or ex smokers.

[debinok1]

Over the same three year period Doctors have implemented testing of at risk patients and medicated those who showed signs of being at risk.
Over the same three year period Doctors have encouraged loweer fat diets.
Over the same three years they have encouraged more active lifestyles.
So without a scientific study how can they make the claim that it was ONLY the result of the smoking ban.

[debinok1]

As far as my "technical background". No I am not a Doctor, what I am is a Daughter and Grand Daughter of Heart Disease victims. Neither smoked or lived with smokers. The one thing they had in common and the same thing I am monitored for very closely is DIABETES. They both had it, it caused them both to have Heart Disease. My blood sugar is tested every three months. I smoke, My Doctor worries more about the onset of Diabetes than he does my smoking, because Diabetes is MY risk factor.

[troutfisher4]

So without a scientific study how can they make the claim that it was ONLY the result of the smoking ban.

Posted by DebinOK1


As a smoker, you are simply in denial. My mother did the same thing, until smoking eventually killed her. I suspect you are also obese, due to the comment about diabetes.

Your health, your choice.

[debinok1]

suspect you are also obese, due to the comment about diabetes.

Your health, your choice.


Posted by troutfisher4
**********************************
Actually, NO I am not obese I am 5''5" and 125lbs.
The Diabetes risk is hereditary.

[Renegade.Rivers]

This is just another crappy piece of tainted journalism like so many others that the corporate media puts out day after day.

Another piece written to justify the taking of our freedoms that they are taking little by little, and some of you cheer them on like idiots. If you don''t like smoking fine don''t, if you don''t like going to smoke filled rooms, don''t.

At the same time what about the other person who does? Aren''t his rights just as important as yours? Today they take his rights, tomorrow they take yours. Yet, today you cheer them on like you believe fascism and tyranny is the way it should be.

Some of you people are so square-headed you can''t see reality for living in your dream world. Well I am telling you you better wake up, because they may not be knocking at your door today, but they could be tomorrow.

Unless we stand together, we will all fall together. Everyday, law makers pass another law, and it may not affect you today, but the one tomorrow may well. I advise you all to watch what you ask for, because you might get a lot more than you wanted.

Happy New Year.

[debinok1]

Some of you people are so square-headed you can''''t see reality for living in your dream world. Well I am telling you you better wake up, because they may not be knocking at your door today, but they could be tomorrow.

Unless we stand together, we will all fall together. Everyday, law makers pass another law, and it may not affect you today, but the one tomorrow may well. I advise you all to watch what you ask for, because you might get a lot more than you wanted.

Happy New Year.

Posted by renrivers
*****************
So true. My Grandmother always said to watch the bandwagon you go jumping on because the next on coming through may be after you.

[debinok1]

Troutfish, You really irk me. You like so many others "assume" someone at risk for Diabetes or diagnosed with it is FAT. I have news for you. Diabetes does not care how much you weigh. My Grandmother was tiny, she was 5'' and weighed maybe 90 lbs, my Mother was 5''2" and weighed 110. Diabetes can cause complications that include, Heart Disease, High Blood pressure, Kidney Disease, Blindness, among many others. It is a hereditary disease that affects over 23 million people. Out of those 23 million, almost 16 million will die from Heart Disease.

[McHineguy]

Its scientifically documented that smoking increases health risks. Now, we expect to provide health insurance to everyone. Why should I pay more for health insurance (or new taxes) to help pay medical costs for people who smoke?

Its now being studied, and early results are coming in that even we who do not smoke suffere increase health risks when we associate with people who do. I don tthink that is fair.

Smokers, its ok if you insist on smoking. Just do it by yourselves and dont ask the rest of us to share the costs of your care. Maybe you can form separate clubs where you sneak off and "have one" but stop claiming the laws limit your freedom when you so openly abuse mine.

[samael2014]

WHERE is the science or documented mechanism for coming to this conclusion?

And why is CBS focused on this and ignoring the FACT that pre-mature births in the state of IOWA DECREASED by 60% during seven STRAIGHT months in 1997 when a BAN on crop circles was enforced?

[Renegade.Rivers]

... but stop claiming the laws limit your freedom when you so openly abuse mine.

Posted by machineguy
-
Whether I am a smoker or not, is not the issue here, the issue is the lose of our freedoms. Let me point out to you some things you should be concerned about.

The increase in cancer over the last few decades has been attributed to a lot of things besides smoking or breathing second-hand. I wonder how concerned you are about them.

Fluoride in the water you drink.

Thermisol in vaccinations.

Chemical residue on fresh fruits and vegetables that water will not was off.

Additives in food that are proven to cause cancer at much higher rates than smoking, or breathing second hand smoke.

Aspartame, if you drink diet sodas, or eat any other diet foods, Aspartame is made out of e-coli, and very dangerous.

Medicines that have not been properly tested by the FDA.

Chemicals that are being sprayed into the atmosphere, i.e Chemtrails.

I could go on and on, but you surely get the idea. Yet you believe by singling out the smoker it is going to make you safer?

That was my point exactly, it is a ruse, and in the process it''s just one more right that is taken away, then another and another.

Please wake up there my friend, you are being led down a long dark road, that is filled with a lot of nasty consequences. If you doubt my accuracy on anything I have just mentioned, please do some research. It really would be in yours and your families best interest.

[truth_police]

This is a RUSE (counterfeit) CBS Comments page. Only people who actually SUBMIT an opinion or comment can see any of these comments. And if they migrate away to another webpage afterwards, they cannot get back to this so-called ''comments'' page where these opinions are posted, UNLESS they submit another opinion. The only way to access this ''comments'' page is to submit an opinion. 99 percent of the article readers do not submit opinions, but like me, they want to read other''s comments. So 99.9999 percent of the people who read the subject article cannot see your comments. Your opinion has, for all practical purposes, been completely stifled, silenced, censored, smothered, muzzled, gagged, suffocated by CBS. YOU''VE BEEN DUPED ... SUCKER-PUNCHED right out of the ring. Shuttled to a sound-proof booth where essentially no one can hear you. When I submit an opinion I want the same audience the article had or why bother. Like most people, I''m not interested in being shuttled off to a sound-proof booth where my opinion is effectively muzzled, silenced. Here you are talking to empty seats. What good is it to have a "Readers'' Comments" section when there is no realistic way for readers of the article to access the comments? CBS is defrauding you with a ruse, counterfeit comments webpage.

[debinok1]

Did ANYONE even bother to read the last paragraph of this article?

"The study assumed declines in the amount of secondhand smoke in Pueblo buildings after the ban, but did not try to measure that. The researchers also did not sort out which heart attack patients were smokers and which were not, so it''s unclear how much of the decline can be attributed to reduced secondhand smoke. "

They did not do a scientific study.
There is no research backing up this statement.
The only thing they know for a FACT is that in the last three years they have had a 41% reduction in Heart Disease related admissions. They do not know how many were smokers and how many were non smokers.

[legacyabq]

CAREFULLY READ the LAST PARAGRAPH AGAIN!!----------------

"The study assumed declines in the amount of secondhand smoke in Pueblo buildings after the ban, but did not try to measure that. The researchers also did not sort out which heart attack patients were smokers and which were not, so it''s unclear how much of the decline can be attributed to reduced secondhand smoke." -------------

Duh, that means its not scientific.. Look, no matter how tempting it may be, CORRELATION does not equal CAUSATION.. These scientists ought to know better. It''s one of the first things they teach you ina science class at university

[legacyabq]

Posted by DebinOK1 at 07:55 PM : Dec 31, 2008


I did, I did!!!

: )

[debinok1]

did, I did!!!

: )


Posted by legacyABQ
*******************
ROFL, Yes I saw that.

[debinok1]

I know this is off topic. Has anyone else noticed the strange behaviour of the wildlife recently?

[debinok1]

I have lived in Oklahoma for the majority of my 42 years. Never have I seen seagulls here. I saw them in Florida when I lived there. We have flocks of them this year. I am in Oklahoma and I HAVE GULL POOP on my car.

[budfrank1]

Wow! That''s great! If they''d ban hamburgers, think of the drop in heart attacks. If they''d only lower the speed limit, think of the drop in fatalities! If they''d only ban cars, think of all the lives that would be saved! Long live the Nanny State!

[troutfisher4]

I have lived in Oklahoma for the majority of my 42 years. Never have I seen seagulls here. I saw them in Florida when I lived there. We have flocks of them this year. I am in Oklahoma and I HAVE GULL POOP on my car.

Posted by DebinOK1


global warming - species moving north

Of course, you think global warming is a hoax, LOL.

[aztecdakota]

I am 72, had a strong heart attack in 2000, lived through it , got a stint. Came home, made a decision to smoke only 3 cigarettes a day. Smoked one. Was walking through the living room with my hands full of packs of cigs and tobacco stuff. Wife said, what are you doing? I said, This is going to be fertilizer in our yard, I quit. I am entering into the 9th year now since that day. For the past two years, my heart clinic has declared me "Clear", praise the Lord. Smoking is no joking. I have lived 9 more years than I should have, and am still going strong. Make your own choice.

[rudy6543]

I am all for banning smoking every where. I know people who smoke and I really care for them. I hate to see what the krap does to a person''s health. When I studied anatomy we looked at the lungs of a 50 year old man who had died from lung disease. Up until then, I had never imagined that a person only 50 years old could die from lung disease. I believe in personal responsibility, but I don''t believe in supporting the facilitators of the vice.

[rudy6543]

Posted by oledakota at 09:47 PM

I hope your example will inspire others. Congratulations on an excellent decision and your success!

[grammawhamma]

Smokers, its ok if you insist on smoking. Just do it by yourselves and dont ask the rest of us to share the costs of your care. Maybe you can form separate clubs where you sneak off and "have one" but stop claiming the laws limit your freedom when you so openly abuse mine.
Posted by machineguy at 06:37 PM : Dec 31, 2008

That won''t work because before you know it, the smoke free zealots would be crying that the seperate ''smokers club'' contained smelly deadly second hand smoke and they wanted to enter it without being exposed to those deadly fumes.

More than worrying about the costs of a smoker''s care, you should be more worried about the cost to your pocketbook of someone who dies of longevity and spends the last 25-30 years of their life on Medicare sitting in a nursing home.

[grammawhamma]

When I submit an opinion I want the same audience the article had or why bother. Like most people, I''''m not interested in being shuttled off to a sound-proof booth where my opinion is effectively muzzled, silenced. Here you are talking to empty seats. What good is it to have a "Readers'''' Comments" section when there is no realistic way for readers of the article to access the comments? CBS is defrauding you with a ruse, counterfeit comments webpage.

Posted by Truth_Police at 07:43 PM : Dec 31, 2008


What have you been smoking?

[timothyone-2009]

Many industry sponsored studies show that the result of this and similar studies are in fact inaccurate, and grossly misleading. Several half-century long studies have shown that regular tobacco use not only increases longevity, it gives the smoker a distinctive and appealing aroma, and a very attractive coloring of the teeth. While some complain that tobacco is harmful to human health, industry experts have shown the regular coughing and hacking that often accompanies the smoking of fine tobaccos is not only good exercise for the heart and lungs, it serves to help rid the lungs of other impurities such as the small flying insects and the deadly pollen often found in the air we breath.
Overall, tobacco use is a boon to human health, with the only known possible draw back being the annoyance created when the confident, young cigarette smoker appears stronger and more attractive to the opposite ***. Just ask any tobacco farmer or stock holder.

[carlylaine]

Another Bullshiite study to PROVE that they are the ones who know what''s the best for us. I say BULLSHIITE!!!!! Keep your nasty socialistic fingers off my STUFF!!!!

MY FREEDOM!
MY CHOICE!
MY LIFE!

[carlylaine]

HEY rudy6543: WHEN did you become a control freak? Do you only follow studies that agree with your ideals? KEEP YOUR HANDs off my life!!!!

[wl7bzh]

Talk to folks about,diet,exercise,safe *** or not smoking and you''ll get the same smug response-"we all gotta die from something-might as well enjoy life"

Then when these same folks are confronted with the result of years of unhealthy living, out comes the denial,anger, bargaining, etc.

It''s kinda like watching a rerun of a really bad movie-you know the lines by heart. It''s all been done before. Ya smile and bite your tongue to keep from telling them what you really think.

People wonder why specialty medicine is so danged expensive.

[amrt5016]

Another Bullshiite study to PROVE that they are the ones who know what''''s the best for us. I say BULLSHIITE!!!!! Keep your nasty socialistic fingers off my STUFF!!!!
Posted by CarlyLaine at 05:58 AM : Jan 01, 2009

The population that we should be concerned about doesn''t include just smokers but also those who aren''t smokers but are exposed to second-hand smoke. Polluting the environment, in this case, the air in the immediate vicinity, is no less reprehensible than throwing toxic chemicals in the ground that can seep into other people''s source of ground water.

[tngreen]

CarlyLaine, if you can figure out a way to keep your nasty cigarette smoke out of my air, then for all I care you can eat a carton of cigarettes a day. My air, my freedom to breathe, MY LIFE.

[troutfisher4]

MY FREEDOM!
MY CHOICE!
MY LIFE!

Posted by CarlyLaine


MY FREEDOM: Freedom to smoke stops when it affects the ability of others to breath clean air.

MY CHOICE: Choose wisely. You have nothing without your health.

MY LIFE: Will certainly be shorter if you continue to smoke.

[ironore068]

What a crock of ***. Cars kill qicker than smoking. Hop in a room with 20 smokers for a day and you come out fine. Hop in a room with 1 running car and you have 3 minutes until you are dead dead dead.
I am a Funeral Director so I know.
Stop telling *** to the world you morons and start giving warranties on the doctors work. Oh that is right. You can''t give a warranty because you cannot guarantee that you are going to be right???????
Wake up to yourselves you tossers and start realising that your job is only in the hospitals. Go and cull a few crocodiles and sharks for us if you want to save lives. Or further get rid of the USA and Israel if you want to save our lives!!!!!
DZH

[ironore068]

machineguy,
You complain about peoples smoking costing you but you don''t care about exhaust fumes from cars hurting you. A room full of smokers and you walk home free with second hand smoke. A room with 1 car and you die from second hand smoke. I bet you drive your car into undercover parking and don''t even consider what you are doing???? I am a Funeral Director and have been in the family business for 40 years so **** off with your ***. Why don''t you complain about the billions of dollars your piece of *** government is sending off to other countries like Israel so the can just bomb innocent people. Oh that''s right!!! Only the smokers are costing you money!!!!!

Smokers, its ok if you insist on smoking. Just do it by yourselves and dont ask the rest of us to share the costs of your care. Maybe you can form separate clubs where you sneak off and "have one" but stop claiming the laws limit your freedom when you so openly abuse mine.
Posted by machineguy at 06:37 PM : Dec 31, 2008

[rudy6543]

Posted by ironore068 at 03:22 PM

I love how smokers try and justify willful stupidity. Get a BRAIN!

[rudy6543]

More than worrying about the costs of a smoker''''s care, you should be more worried about the cost to your pocketbook of someone who dies of longevity and spends the last 25-30 years of their life on Medicare sitting in a nursing home.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by GrammaWhamma at 02:35 AM

Hey idiot! Yeah, great idea. Let''s encourage more smoking so people die younger and we don''t have to pay for longevity. Smoke old witch! Smoke all you want. The sooner you''re gone the better, eh?

[rudy6543]

HEY rudy6543: WHEN did you become a control freak? Do you only follow studies that agree with your ideals? KEEP YOUR HANDs off my life!!!!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by CarlyLaine at 06:35 AM

Find a bridge and jump off. Your life.

[troutfisher4]

I encourage all you smokers to continue. Since it cuts way down on your life expectancy, that will leave more money in SS and Medicare when I retire. Thanks!

[bloggerbud]

I''m glad I don''t have my Cardiology practice in Colorado.

I need those smokers to put gas in my Porsche and pay for my condo on the beach.

[grammawhamma]

Hey idiot! Yeah, great idea. Let''''s encourage more smoking so people die younger and we don''''t have to pay for longevity. Smoke old witch! Smoke all you want. The sooner you''''re gone the better, eh? ----------------------------------------------------
Posted by rudy6543 at 04:15 PM : Jan 01, 2009


Find a bridge and jump off. Your life. -------------------------------------------
Posted by rudy6543 at 04:18 PM : Jan 01, 2009


I love how smokers try and justify willful stupidity. Get a BRAIN!------------------------------------------------------
Posted by rudy6543 at 04:12 PM : Jan 01, 2009


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I''d rather have smoke on my breath than a foul mouth like yours.

[rudy6543]

I''''d rather have smoke on my breath than a foul mouth like yours.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by GrammaWhamma at 07:35 PM

You have a foul mouth and stinky breath. Anyone who complains about spending more money because people might live longer...you can''t get more foul than that.

[wl7bzh]

What a crock of ***. Cars kill qicker than smoking. Hop in a room with 20 smokers for a day and you come out fine. Hop in a room with 1 running car and you have 3 minutes until you are dead dead dead.
I am a Funeral Director so I know.
Stop telling *** to the world you morons and start giving warranties on the doctors work. Oh that is right. You can''''t give a warranty because you cannot guarantee that you are going to be right???????
Wake up to yourselves you tossers and start realising that your job is only in the hospitals. Go and cull a few crocodiles and sharks for us if you want to save lives. Or further get rid of the USA and Israel if you want to save our lives!!!!!
DZH

Posted by ironore068 at 03:09 PM : Jan 01, 2009

Funeral director? I can see where any discussion of healthy living would really cut into your bottom line.

You guys still playing the "shoebox" gambit in order to guilt the grieving into an expensive wake?

Can''t wait till the cremation industry puts you bloodsuckers outta business.