Third Hand Smoke Has Reached Sirius


Buying a house from a smoker could prove dangerous for your health, study finds

Third hand smoke permeates furniture, carpets and walls and could prove toxic, even months after people have stopped smoking in it, scientists say

Buying a home from a smoker could increase the risk of cancer as third-hand smoke is almost impossible to remove from carpets, curtains and walls, a new study suggests.

Scientists found that exposure to the toxic chemicals that infiltrate the home could be particularly dangerous for young children prone to explore and put things in their mouths.

They said third-hand smoke residue could be absorbed into almost any porous surface, which then leaked out over time.

“We were really surprised by how persistent the contamination is in the home, even months after people have stopped smoking in it.”

Dr Georg Matt, a psychologist from San Diego State University in the US who has studied the effects of third-hand smoke for 20 years, said: “Homes become reservoirs of tobacco smoke pollutants.

“These volatile compounds soak into the drywall. Gypsum is like a bottomless pit for these toxins. Carpets are tremendous reservoirs.”

Toxic for just months after people have stopped smoking in them?

Pah!! If gypsum plaster is a ‘bottomless pit’, and the residue leaks out slowly over time, it’s hardly likely to have all leaked out after a mere six months. Or one year. Or ten years. Or a century. Or even five centuries.

Think about it. There are some houses in England where people have been smoking for hundreds of years. And that third-hand smoke residue will have completely permeated all the plaster, and all the timber, and all the bricks, and probably all the stones too.

So an Elizabethan timber frame house will have got about 450 years of third-hand smoke gradually permeating  the entire fabric. It’s like an enormous vat of third-hand smoke. And it’s all going to slowly leak back out. What goes in must come out – just like what goes up must come down.

The walls could be thought of as bottomless lungs which inhale third-hand smoke, and exhale it a few hundred years later.

And of course there’s No Safe Level of the third-hand tobacco smoke that was last inhaled by the walls from Sir Francis Drake’s pipe, and is only now being exhaled, 450 years later. You do know that there’s No Safe Level, don’t you?

Clearly the only thing to do is to demolish all buildings over 10 years old. And bury all antique furniture, paintings, carpets, and clothes.

Vincent_van_Gogh_SunflowersYou’ve got a painting by Vincent van Gogh? It’s called ‘Sunflowers’, you say? You do know that van Gogh was a pipe smoker, don’t you? Before the paint was even dry, this painting had already absorbed copious quantities of third-hand smoke. Why do you think it’s got that yellowish colour? It’s the third-hand smoke leaking back out of it, of course! You say it’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars? Not any more! It’s worthless. I’ll give you a fiver for it, if you want it taken off your hands, as a special favour.

But the real trouble with third-hand smoke is that it never, ever goes away. It’s far worse than radioactive uranium or plutonium, because all radioactive materials have half-lives. But there’s no half-life for tobacco smoke. It just goes on and on and on for ever and ever and ever.

And even if you burn contaminated materials, all that you end up doing is releasing the trapped third-hand smoke inside them – which can’t be burned because it’s already been burned.

You really have to think of the Earth’s atmosphere as being contaminated by all the tobacco smoke that has ever been smoked. Living on planet Earth is like living inside one enormous smokers’ lung. In fact, like living inside all the lungs of all the smokers that ever lived.

You’ll have to go to Mars if you want a smoke-free world. Except that tobacco smoke can cross interplanetary space. So the entire solar system is permeated with orbiting fourth- and fifth-hand tobacco smoke. And because solar radiation pressure accelerates micron-sized fifth-hand tobacco smoke radially out into space, it’s probably got to Sirius by now.

About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

73 Responses to Third Hand Smoke Has Reached Sirius

  1. Smoking Lamp says:

    Yes, the antismoker propaganda becomes more absurd every day. It’s interesting that a psychologist is the spokesperson for a ‘third-hand smoke’ study. It certainly ties in with yesterday’s post on ‘Mad Behavioural Psychologists’. These lunatics belong in an asylum rater than being left loose where they can recruit for their hateful cult.

    • edith482 says:

      Why on earth was a psychologist studying the effects of ‘third hand smoke’? Psychologists are not even scientists . This appalling hate campaign is now becoming lunatic.

    • beobrigitte says:

      It’s interesting that a psychologist is the spokesperson for a ‘third-hand smoke’ study.
      Perhaps being a spokesperson for third-, fourth-, fifth-, idiotic-hand smoke is just too stupid, even for a “scientist” who received his/her PhD on curry recipes?

    • slugbop007 says:

      Health Psychologists, they are all the rage. Universities crank them out like sausages.

  2. marieengling says:

    I would call it superstition :D

  3. magnetic01 says:

    There’s just a small number of fraudsters pushing the “thirdhand smoke” scam, e.g., Georg Matt, John Winickoff, Hugo Destaillats, Virender Rehan, Manuela Martins-Green. They all sponge from the “Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program” (TRDRP), a fund created by the MSA to specifically finance antismoking “research”.

    Some background:

    Earlier “thirdhand” trash at the BMJ blog:

  4. magnetic01 says:

    The 2013 “study” was conducted by the moron Georg Matt. Here’s an intro to the dishonest miscreant:

    There are a number of points that need to be highlighted concerning Matt’s or any other so-called “research” on “thirdhand smoke”. Firstly, there is no smoke. Typically considered are one or two residues (e.g., nicotine) – not peculiar to tobacco smoke – of what may have once been smoke. These few residues are chosen because they’re the only chemicals that can be measured, and then only at trace levels. The “research” is based on the approach that there is a relatively higher concentration of these chemicals in smoking-permitted rooms. Lost in the dross is that these chemicals are also found in smoking-banned rooms and that, at this baseline, the chemicals are at trace levels. The research attempts to lead the reader, i.e., propaganda, that a higher relative level of these chemicals that is only slightly higher than a trace-level baseline is “dangerous” or “hazardous”. Hence the second and very critical point – the research does not address hazard or health effects at all: It is not in a position to make any health claims about these relatively higher, although very low, chemical residues. If no hazard is indicated, then why do people need to protect themselves from all exposure which is contained in the headline? Yet, Matt is attempting to convince readers – through a masquerade of “scientific research” – that they do need protection, i.e., antismoking propagandist.

    Here’s some more Matt trash from a few years ago:
    The article actually notes that “although health outcomes have not yet been studied”. Yet, both the article and study are replete with such baseless, inflammatory, and leading terms such as “pollutants”, “toxins”, “contamination”, “particular risk”. The article is entitled “Lingering Effects of Thirdhand Smoke”. Yet, there are no demonstrated “effects”.

    This situation provides an opportunity to consider the messed-up state of academia. Matt is Chair of the Department of Psychology at San Diego State University. Yet, Matt is a behaviorist……. he wouldn’t have a clue about psychology. A behaviorist is only interested in the coercion of “right” behavior. An actual psychologist would be highly critical of inflammatory propaganda: It is an assault on mental health; it promotes irrational belief, fear, and hatred. But not to a behaviorist who has no interest whatsoever in accuracy of belief. The behaviorist’s only interest is in conditioning of “right” behavior. Messing with people’s minds through inaccurate beliefs to coerce “right” behavior is not problematic because, for behaviorism, mind does not exist – only behavior exists.

    So, we have people with no psychological aptitude that dominate psychology departments. This is occurring worldwide. In many cases psychology departments have at least been renamed “behavioral sciences”. The interest of this “discipline” is how to get people to engage in the “right” behavior [according to physicalism].

    But the situation at San Diego is even more perverse. The question could well be asked why Matt, a behaviorist, is generating the foundational “chemistry” research. It would seem that Matt is a rabid antismoker that is attempting to force a “line of enquiry”; those involved in chemistry don’t see “thirdhand smoke” as worthy of study. He also sponges from TRDRP, one of the funding pools created from the Master Settlement Agreement specifically intended for antismoking “research”.

  5. marieengling says:

    Chapman concludes 2011:
    “It is important that research documents residuals from tobacco smoke. But it is equally important that consumers and policy makers are not led to believe that the chemical compounds thus located are somehow unique to tobacco smoke. Unless in the extremely unlikely event that residents burn copious quantities of solanaceous vegetables (aubergine, tomato) which contain small amounts of nicotine, tobacco is going to be the only source of nicotine in homes. But it will not by any means be the only source of many of the ingredients of “third hand smoke” that the unwitting or the fumophobic may believe are attributable only to smoking. The omission of this information in such reports risks harming the credibility of tobacco control.”

    • Rose says:

      Chapman does his best with this inconvenient truth, but you dont have to “burn copious quantities of solanaceous vegetables (aubergine, tomato) which contain small amounts of nicotine” you just have to cook them.


      “Many plants of the Solanaceae family, which includes the genus Nicotiana, of which the tobacco plant is a member, contain solanesol; particularly those that contain trace amounts of nicotine.
      These include the tomato, eggplant, potato, and pepper.

      The potential interference due to these sources is negligible, cooking being the only likely potential source of interference. An interference of this type would bias results high, overestimating the contribution of ETS to RSP.”

      Click to access CRM_52.pdf

      But that negligible amount must surely build up in the walls over time too, according to Thirdhand Smoke theory.

    • Harleyrider1978 says:

      They have no credibility and by rehashing the debunked shs and third hand trash they are playing their last hand in this poker game. Its really laughable as it sounds like the end is here for TC. Seems Obama is having a last minute WH meeting over the HUD smoking ban. Something is up and I know it isn’t good for TCs agenda.

    • magnetic01 says:

      Thirdhand Tobacco Smoke Expsoure and Health Risk Assessment – Neil Benowitz
      Award: $1,742,462

      • Ah – everything adds up: Big Pharma is involved in the third hand hoax. And Neal Benowitz is their PI – prime investigator:

        “The California Consortium on Thirdhand Tobacco Smoke has been funded by TRDRP to conduct research on the impact of thirdhand smoke (THS) on public health. The Consortium is led by Neal Benowitz MD (PI) … ”

        His record: Strong financial ties to Big Pharma through four decades. Benowitz is their man. There’s no doubt he is beholden to them:

        “Since the 1980’s Dr. Benowitz has consulted for numerous pharmaceutical companies about the design of the NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) and other smoking-cessation drugs. He consulted for affiliates of Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline as to such products, even while serving on the TPSAC. Among the companies for which he has consulted are GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, and Aradigm Corp.”

        • Roobeedoo2 says:

          It would be interesting to see some sort map or diagram of how the individuals and organisations are related. If it could show the flow of funding… It might help people visualise how big the busyness of Anti Tobacco really is.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Roobeedoo, TRANSPARENCY can’t come fast enough. After all, we are being fed “research” financed by tobacco control&friends-who-and-with-benefits when they sneakily kicked out opposition financed research.

          Give me a reason to believe tobacco control financed research. I can’t find any.

        • Roobeedoo2 says:

          Something like this, BB? If one man do it with the whole Universe… ;)

        • Don’t forget Benowitz’s biggest contribution to the Antis: the launching of The Good Ship “Addiction” 30 year ago via the New York Times et al. See:

          That single, totally Orwellian, redefinition of a simple English word so that it would move tobacco from being a “Ho hum, yeah, you’re “addicted” to smoking eh? Tell me another one!” thing to being “The most addictive drug in the world” back in the 1980s opened the doorway to the whole “Protect The Children From Evil Big Tobacco Who’s Addicting Them To Drugs” campaign and was responsible for a whole lot of what followed.

          – MJM

        • Roobeedoo2 says:

          ‘When the first warnings about tobacco were published more than 20 years ago, many experts thought that smoking was ”no different than compulsive potato chip eating,” says Dr. Henningfield.’

          And look at them go after ‘junk’ food… lol

          ‘Addicted’ has legal overtones. I’ve never been to court and yet I’m ‘addicted’ – doesn’t make sense:

        • slugbop007 says:

          Gary Giovino, newly appointed to the FDA, is also beholden to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. They helped pay for his education. Sally Satel as well. And hundreds, nay thousands, of them in the past ten years. It’s like The Godfather. Kiss the ring, win the prize.

  6. magnetic01 says:

    All of these “investigators” are rabid antismokers.

    Here’s Matt addressing the ultra-rabid antismoking group “Group to Alleviate Smoking Pollution” (GASP)

    Click to access GeorgMattonThirdhandSmoke.pdf

    • Although Winickoff got the kudos for inventing the term “thirdhand smoke” in the popular mind with his hokey interpretation of the results of an opinion survey that the press picked up, with his evident encouragement, and translated into scientific research,”it was Matt who had actually performed the first real recognized thirdhand smoke nonsense study several years earlier when the found that there was more nicotine in the dust of homes where people smoked regularly than in homes where they did not.

      Did he find anything harmful? Of course not. BUT… by playing the old “Commander Almost Zero” fallacy card he was able to make people THINK it was harmful. How? Well *everyone knows* that “nicotine is a poison and kills millions of smokers,” (The fact that the statement is medical nonsense doesn’t matter: it’s what “everyone” BELIEVES.); so, when Matt was able to show 10 or 20 or 50 TIMES as much in the dust of smokers’ homes, everyone was absolutely shocked.

      Of course 50 times a picogram is still just 50 picograms and you’d have to pile up 20 million picograms into a great big pile before you’d have something as big as a grain of salt, but when you say “There is FIFTY TIMES AS MUCH POISON” in someone’s home, people sit up and pay attention, whether the actual measurements have any real-world meaning or not.

      – MJM

    • magnetic01 says:

      Matt the “expert”

      Dr. Georg Matt
      Georg E. Matt, PhD, Professor, Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, is an expert in THS measurements, biomarkers, behaviors and policy implications. His research is focused on designing better strategies to protect nonsmokers from SHS and THS. He has published several important papers on THSand is the lead author of the recently released review paper, “Thirdhand tobacco smoke: emerging evidence and arguments for a multidisciplinary research agenda”.

  7. magnetic01 says:

    Remember that “thirdhand smoke” was a concoction of rabid antismoking nut case Chuck Crawford of Kimball Physics way back in the early 1990s. Crawford is a long-time board member of the rabid [American] antismoking organization, Action on Smoking & Health (ASH) – see my comments here:

  8. waltc says:

    When do you thinkthey’ll have finally jumped the shark?

  9. Lepercolonist says:

    “But there’s no half-life for tobacco smoke.”
    I love that sentence.

    • Joe L. says:

      I do too. Actually, this ridiculous article appears to claim tobacco smoke has the inverse of a half-life (does that make it a double-life?):

      “The scientists found that the longer the chemicals lingered in their environment, the more chemical reactions occurred that could turn otherwise innocuous compounds into harmful ones.”

      So, not only does tobacco smoke linger on indefinitely, it actually grows more potent over time due to an infinite chain of chemical reactions! WTF?

      • nisakiman says:

        Yes, it does appear that tobacco smoke is imbued with magical properties. We should perhaps suggest that it could become a viable alternative to nuclear power once they discover how to harness it’s incredibly destructive potential. Mind you, there is a problem insofar as the acute toxicity would have to be contained. This would pose a problem, since it is well known that tobacco smoke can pass through concrete with impunity, and also travel through wires. Still, I’m sure the ‘experts’ would be able to find a solution. They seem to know all about the amazing properties of tobacco smoke already.

        • Nisaki, don’t forget that tobacco smoke has also conquered time travel! According to official testimony at the NY City Council in the year 2000, the 1998 California bar ban caused a drop in lung cancer rates of 14% found in a study concluded in 1996 — two years before it went into effect!

          Re Thirdhand smoke and half life etc, my favorite old reliable original analysis of its threat as portrayed by the NY Times and Scientific American (Sci Am has since permanently banned me from posting on its message boards after I attempted to post to its “Sitting Is The New Smoking” article.) can be read at:

          Amazing, eh? Not just time travel, but time travel 100 times beyond the age of our entire universe!

          – MJM
          P.S. That “double-life” thing is a newbie! Sheesh… “The Hits Just Keep On Coming!” don’t they? LOL!

        • Some French Bloke says:

          They seem to know all about the amazing properties of tobacco smoke already.

          Not quite, Nisaki, since the standard heading of anti-smoking articles these days often goes something like “nth-hand smoke more hazardous than previously thought”, which shows that the zealots themselves are perpetually finding out how mistaken they were until their latest ‘research’, and hence how tragically their health warnings had in fact been downplaying the risks up till then…

        • beobrigitte says:

          Nisaki, don’t forget that tobacco smoke has also conquered time travel! According to official testimony at the NY City Council in the year 2000, the 1998 California bar ban caused a drop in lung cancer rates of 14% found in a study concluded in 1996 — two years before it went into effect!

          Thank you, Michael! Makes my day!

  10. Rose says:

    Excellent news. This should set the cat amongst the pigeons.

    22nd Century Files Modified Risk Tobacco Product Application with the FDA for World’s Lowest Nicotine Tobacco Cigarettes
    January 04, 2016

    The World’s Lowest Nicotine Tobacco Cigarettes

    “BRAND A cigarettes contain less than 0.6 mg nicotine per cigarette and less than 0.05 mg nicotine yield per cigarette. In each case, this represents a reduction of at least 95% less nicotine relative to “Big Tobacco” cigarette brands, including Marlboro®, Camel®, Newport®, and American Spirit®. With more than 200 patents relating to the genes in the tobacco plant responsible for nicotine production, 22nd Century is the only company in the world capable of producing virtually nicotine-free tobacco. Without any artificial extraction or chemical processes, 22nd Century’s BRAND A cigarettes are made with the Company’s proprietary VLN tobacco that is grown on independently-owned farms in the United States.

    The finished cigarettes have the taste and sensory characteristics of conventional cigarettes, but contain only trace amounts of nicotine so that smokers’ exposure to nicotine is drastically reduced.”

    If they prove a success as I expect they will, as a non-believer in the Nicotine Addiction Theory , I relish the prospect of watching TC and it’s minions and hangers on trying to wriggle out of that.

    • nisakiman says:

      Yes, that’s the problem really, isn’t it Rose? When you’ve spent a few decades screaming hysterically about the evils of nicotine and someone comes out with a nicotine-free tobacco, there isn’t anywhere to turn.

      Not, of course, that that will stop them, unfortunately. As we well know, they are past masters at manufacturing ‘science’ to back up their prohibitionist mindset. Pace the alacrity with which they began the demonisation of e-cigarettes.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      The only thing that my heart doc hyped on was carbon monoxide levels reducing vein size. Ive read in the Nazis strudies CO level can lower vein size by 5%,yet Ive never seen anyone prove this. You have to watch the docs they don’t order up continine level checks they test your CO levels for if your smoking. Heres the gig CO levels if you abstain go back to normal levels in 24 hours or less and if you get hold of a cpap machine you can reduce the CO levels overnite to near nothing levels if you wanna keep the doc off your ass. Or just hit grandmas oxygen bottle as oxygen forces CO out of the blood.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        CO levels on the test run 21-32 mine was 29 but that’s because I smoked me about 7 cigs that morning before going to the blood test like an idiot. Thing is before my levels would hit 34-36 and my smoking doc said it was fine………..

  11. prog says:

    Yep, total bollocks but no doubt Peter would disagree.


    ‘E-cigarettes have been granted a licence by Britain’s medicines regulator for the first time, opening the door for them to be prescribed on the NHS. The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) has awarded a licence to British American Tobacco for its e-Voke device that will allow it to be marketed as a smoking cessation aid.’

    Doubly interesting given that these mimic the real thing.

    • beobrigitte says:

      Thanks prog, I didn’t know this!
      Can patients in hospitals now use their e-cig in their beds? What is the point of kicking patients out into wind and weather when taking a smoking replacement aid?
      As far as I know quite a lot of vapers use e-cigs as (highly) successful smoking cessation aid; others, like me, use e-cigs for stretching tobacco supply.

      I welcome this decision mostly for mentally ill patients, locked up behind closed doors and more, such as e.g. paralysed, bed-bound patients.

      Doubly interesting given that these mimic the real thing.
      “Debbie&co’s” screeching about this still rings in my ears…. “Eeek!!! It LOOKS like smoking….”

  12. Harleyrider1978 says:

    Yepper Chris Snowdens right with this garbage being rehashed TC will be dead sooner than the 12 months he suggested.

  13. harleyrider1978 says:

    Audrey Silk

    3 hrs · New York, NY

    What the hell. When they say “White House” meeting do they mean members of Congress — you know, those people who represent their constituents — will be there too?!? And what kind of crap is this to have a meeting with HUD prior to the end of public comment submissions. Granted, I don’t know if opposing voices are invited too but I don’t have my hopes up.

    “Pat McKone, regional senior director for tobacco programs and policy for the American Lung Association of the Upper Midwest, was invited to attend what’s being called the White House Convening on the proposed HUD smoke-free rule, she said on Monday.”

    Local smoke-free housing advocate headed to White House conf…

    An advocate for smoke-free public housing in Duluth and Minnesota is leaving for Washington to attend a White House meeting on a proposed national…

  14. harleyrider1978 says:

    It’s far worse than radioactive uranium or plutonium, because all radioactive materials have half-lives. But there’s no half-life for tobacco smoke. It just goes on and on and on for ever and ever and ever.

    The U.S. national annual background dose for humans is approximately 360 mrem. A mrem, or millirem, is a standard measure of radiation dose. Examples of radiation doses from common medical procedures are:

    Chest x-ray (14 x 17 inch area) – 15 mrem

    Dental x-ray (3 inch diameter area) – 300 mrem

    Spinal x-ray (14 x 17 inch area) – 300 mrem

    Thyroid uptake study – 28,000 mrem to the thyroid

    Thyroid oblation – 18,000,000 mrem to the thyroid

    Average Annual Total
    361 mrem/year

    Tobacco (If You Smoke, Add ~ 280 mrem)

    Not quite 1 dental xray for a whole years smoking ehh!


    Thyroid oblation – 18,000,000 mrem to the thyroid /shrinking the thyroid

    Tobacco (If You Smoke, Add ~ 280 mrem)

    18,000,000 / 280 = roughly 64,000 years of equivalent years of smoking!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe

      This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

      Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

      By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

      Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

      What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

      “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study………………………

      Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

      The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

      Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.


      A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

      Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!

  15. harleyrider1978 says:

    They don’t even mention indoor VOCs from human breath absorbed into the indoors or released from plants or cooking or outdoor air coming in and introducing contaminates that are in normal everyday air they claim is clean LMAO as theres no such thing anywhere.
    Remember formaldehyde is obviously the most released chemical indoors anywhere.
    Lets not forget Mikes GYM comparison of body chemicals released………

    Yes TC is on its death bed!

  16. harleyrider1978 says:

    Nearly everybody breathes in 14-15 packs a day of the same chemicals found in a tobacco smoke by volumetric measure. You see the natural air is made up of all the same chemicals found in tobacco smoke as is all vegetative matter. Its why the Prohibitionists above had chosen continine the bdies metabolite for nicotine as a measure of exposures to SHS/ETS unfortunately for the Prohibitionists nearly all the foods we eat are also full of high doses of nicotine like tomoatoes and potatoes,tea etc etc. All our foods and drinks even water contain the same chemicals as in tobacco smoke. That beautiful restaurant smoke smell from the grill as you drive up full of millions of equal cigarttes. Even indoors the natural air again and then all that hundreds of exhaled human carcinogens being released with every breath you take or every bite you take. Its the same at home or anywhere you may go,you cant escape the same chemicals as whats in tobacco smoke its impossible!

    The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke

    About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms.

    Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). – (Excerpted from “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains” with permission of the author.)

  17. Tom says:

    In Northern California, it has become irrelevant whether Third Hand Smoke is actually dangerous – or not. Why? Because in most of Northern California, including San Francisco and Sacramento areas, the Real Estate Disclosure Document, required to be filled out by all sellers of Real Estate and read and signed as read by all buyers of Real Estate – contains one question that asks if the seller has any awareness of whether a smoker has smoked, ever, either “inside” the property or “outside” the property, out in the yard. If so, it is checked yes, if not known, it is checked no.

    But, whether the seller knows or doesn’t know, checks yes or checks no, that is not the issue. The point is, this now being on the Disclosure Document, the very fact that it is, has manufactured it into “truth”, that there is harm, and is alerting all parties, from now on, if they ever wish to sell a property in the future and not have a hard time or lose money on it, then they had better make damn sure nobody smokes “in” or “on” the property. Period.

    So in that way, in California, Third Hand Smoke has already become legitimized into “truth” and a fearful one at that – it now affects perceived property value, because of that question’s very existence on the disclosure form. And it puts buyers on alert, if they allow smoking in or on their property, when it comes time to sell, their property could be perceived as losing monetary value, as a result. And if they allowed smoking but checked no, later in, in their disclosure to future buyers, they could be sued for not reporting the truth, that someone smoked there.

    So while everyone is debating if Third Hand Smoke is true or false, in places like SF, Sacramento, I imagine other counties in CA, it has already been put into legal documents as if true – and the effect it will have in forbidding smoking anywhere in or on properties, into the future, has already been created. The damage is already done. The horse is already out of the barn and racing down the track. Glantz or his allies have already gone to county RE boards requesting or demanding this disclosure be on documents – so they have already won their case, politically speaking.

    I find the concept of Third Hand Smoke ridiculous of course and not a danger, other than it was first conceived by a popularity poll among 1,000 people, possibly skewed toward anti-smoking persons, as an opinion poll, not one of science, truth or fact.

    But politically speaking, I am saying, it is already being used to further forbid indoor and outdoor smoking in Northern California – even if one is buying to rent the property out, for certain, because of that disclosure, the lease will forbid smoking, indoors or out.

    Nobody wants to get caught answering “yes” to that question in other words, for fear of losing value and money upon resale later on – or from the banks if refinancing or taking on an equity loan. The anti-smoking industry has thus made it a property valuation issue – and yes, this disclosure exists on SF and Sacramento county RE disclosure forms and possibly on other counties as well by this point.

    • nisakiman says:

      That, Tom, is positively Orwellian. It doesn’t bode well for the denizens of California, since there is no way of answering truthfully to that question unless one lives in a new-build property.

      So basically, if the property is more than a few years old, one can check the “NO” box, regardless. Unless there exists a video of you smoking (does that include BBQs? Wood burning stoves?) on the property, it means diddly squat.

      Is there a box for “none of your fucking business” on the form? That’s the one I’d check if I was there.

      • Tom says:

        My point is, it is on the form, All buyers and all sellers are being fore-warned, smoking in or on property can devalue it in the future, because of this question’s very existence. Whether one knows yes or no, how to check the box is irrelevant – unless a buyer later on tries to sue a seller for damages because they were incorrectly informed by a seller answering no, but a neighbor who later tells the buyer, the answer was yes. It’s a financial loss and risk of lawsuit, all ways around – simply because of smoking, yes/no, in or on that property. So the battle has already been won, in favor of the anti-smoking industry, in regard to the third hand smoke “harm” issue. Politically and financially, it has already been resolved in California – and as goes California, so goes the rest of the nation – eventually it will show up in other states on their disclosure forms, magically, overnight, as these things do and after creeping in, maybe six, twelve, eighteen months later, someone might notice it being there, but by then the damage will have been done, in yet another state and close to impossible to change, other than to wait until an entire generation or two of brainwashed people, die off.

        • beobrigitte says:

          Nisakiman is right, this:
          if the property is more than a few years old
          is the key.

          Where does this third-hand-smoke lark leave the owners of (much desired) e.g. Victorian/Georgian era built houses? No-one ever smoked in them? REALLY?
          Even the houses built up until now will be “contaminated” with idiotic-hand-smoke – Let’s hear what all property owners have to say to this “research”.
          BTW, WHO funded this “research”?

        • waltc says:

          What if the house–as our house in S. Cal did– has a fireplace? Wouldn’t it pose the same threat? How could anyone show the diff between having (ever) burned wood v. Tobacco?

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Their treating like any other disclosure like on asbestos or lead paint in the building under sale.
      Its the same everywhere save nobody uses smoking as awarnign fucking label requiring a disclosure. In fact most politicians would laugh you right off the legislative floor for such claims.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Walt what if the home was right beside diesel trucks running the roads all the time or anything in the air like the infamous California smog! Like I said its all BS. Even simon crapman agrees its all bs as magnetic showed above and he even warned the Nazis to stop using it.

  18. Cecily Collingridge says:

    Great post and comments!
    O/T – NHS Smokefree have replied to the comment I posted on their Youtube channel 2 days ago beneath their latest video on COPD that I told you about.

    They wrote:
    Thank you for your comments as all feedback is very important to us. We can reassure you that the ‘Health Harms’ campaigns are never intended to offend or upset anyone and instead they are intended to encourage people to consider the ‘invisible’ or internal damage that smoking has on the body. Our campaigns are designed to encourage people, who are considering giving up smoking, to take the step and get some help to do so. NHS Smokefree provide a range of free support to anyone looking to stop smoking. Kind regards, Smokefree Team.

    I have replied:

    This standard answer does not address any of the points I made. You always say your campaigns “are never intended to offend or upset anyone” and yet they do. You did not withdraw last year’s horror film that drew a lot of comments, among them objections and reports of it being shown on children’s channels. No explanation was given as to how this could have happened and it carried on being shown to kids.

    This continual denial of problems and negative impacts, plus the lack of any explanation is indicative of Empathy Deficit Disorder or some such disease, plus incompetence.

    You have changed tack by focussing on COPD in this film. The athlete’s mother in particular has been put in an impossible situation and her future life course sabotaged.

    I want this film withdrawn.
    I want you to proffer a public apology to all the patients for using them.
    I want you to publish and provide a link on this site to the evaluation by the ethics committee on this film to enable to the public to see how thoroughly you go about your business.

  19. Clicky says:

  20. beobrigitte says:

    Buying a house from a smoker could prove dangerous for your health, study finds

    Third hand smoke permeates furniture, carpets and walls and could prove toxic, even months after people have stopped smoking in it, scientists say

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…. What a joke!!!! *giggle-snigger-giggle*

    I know what I want for my house (if I decide to sell up!) and WILL get easily what I’m asking for. There are too many debt-riddled youngsters who can’t get a house like mine which happens to be in a priceless location.

    There is this thing called money which according to these “scientists” is soaked in third-hand smoke. They better take care and don’t touch it!!! You know, third-hand-smoke on cash crawls through walls into tobacco control&friends’ bank accounts!!!!! They better stay clear of money!!!

    Third hand smoke propaganda is intended to bypass common sense and therefore has gone straight to scientists’ money receptors. (?)

    Thanks for this laugh – I must have looked a little odd this morning on the hard shoulder on the motorway, fan belt dangling underneath the car and me laughing when reading this blog. *Priceless*
    Made a new friend (fellow smoker) – the guy from the recovery service was great!! We both had a laugh on the way to my garage about third-hand, fourth-hand, fifth-hand, idiotic-hand smoke.

    • caprizchka says:

      Glad that you survived. However, if there is any danger of sea levels rising and third hand smoke at the same time, such as here in the retirement capital of the world, Florida U.S.A. then one might as well sell it to the first foreign investor who happens to make an offer for it, out of charity of course. Rest in Peace, Grandma or Grandpa. If only you hadn’t smoked, you could have lived to be 200 years old, and your grateful heirs wouldn’t be placed in such an awkward position. Global Warming doesn’t include certain family members.

  21. smokingscot says:

    Seriously off topic
    Quite good news for those of you with shares in BAT. They won approval from the MHRA to have their brand of e-cigarette classified as a quit-aid. So – ironically – they’ll be able to reap big rewards when the NHS prescribes it for punters who want to give up smoking.

  22. RdM says:

    Clearly the only thing to do is to demolish all buildings over 10 years old.

    There’s already an over-reaction happening with … methamphetamine.

    Meth labs are one thing, but the mere use of it, smoked, is already now being fearfully collated with the same pollution that ‘might’ be generated by the chemicals involved in actually cooking the stuff. So instead of merely being cleaned, if usage suspected, apartments are destroyed, all walls & ceilings taken out, all even impervious surface items like white-ware – fridge, dishwasher, stove, exhaust fan systems, washing machine, dryer, as well as formica benches, all in the name of …

    Precaution, presumably, like “pre-crime”… but, you’d think;- surely it would depend on testing, evidence, surely very low samples from a mere smoker, vs an even an unskilled production cook?

    Maybe, but here’s a perfect opportunity for crime, windfall profits, if you can ‘own’ a testing lab.
    Or influence one…or collaborate with one. I speculate …

    Once issued with a report of high levels of contamination, there’s made work for the remedial building team (read: total destruction ready for re-build) – and ultimately, the actual re-builders.

    If social housing, leased from a private owner, the Govt (taxpayer!) pays the tab. Easy Money!

    If privately owned, well, with the prevailing fear, loss of rents interim, downgrading of value… the bills still have to be paid… a great opportunity for a total rort based on fear and

    Fill in the blanks… superstition? Propaganda? Over-precautionary advice? Criminal collusion?

    I’ve never had any interest in “speed”, or “P” or whatever name methamphetamine might be called by now myself, but I’ve recently witnessed just such a social housing apartment being destroyed (by rather dodgy characters) after apparently alleged usage by the former tenants.

    Notably, they carried out these supposedly contaminated items with bare hands, no protection.
    (I mean, the white-ware, the appliances, the melamine cupboard doors, benches & etc.)
    Filled a couple of large bins with the waste, not only the wall & ceiling boards, but also the insulation behind, the carpets, all bagged up. Even lined the bin, but went in with bare hands!

    The whole operation seemed suspicious, knowing that the tenants might have been mere users.

    Even maybe only smoking on the balcony…


    This is exactly the kind of consequence that could come from the fake 3rd & Nth hand “smoking” “pollution” propaganda if it’s allowed to spread unchecked…

    Totally wanton waste and unnecessary destruction, increased costs, fear and superstition.

    Everything about Tobacco Control seems destructive, particularly of decent democracy.

    The most successful influence campaign ever, climate control running second… so far.

    • Now now RdM! Don’t get all uptight about meth labs. The REAL problem is when you’ve got people smoking in a building where you live. Here’s a comment that was placed after an article on banning smoking in apartment buildings several years ago: Note the little added thought at the end:

      Georgia • Salt Lake City, Utah • 11 hrs ago Report Abuse
      There’s an apartment behind mine and there’s been a lot of secondhand smoke. Most of the people who have rented the apartment have been heavy smokers and in one case the person smoked so much that the amount of secondhand smoke was overwhelming. It would be in the am hours and literally fill my place up. The person was evicted for the smoking plus other things. This new person is also a heavy smoker. He’s supposed to smoke outside but only steps out his front door and smokes so all of it comes into my place plus the am smoking. We have a law banning smoking inside, here, but he does it, anyway. If a person wants to smoke and abide by the law that’s fine but not pollute my space or anyone’s for that matter. Just so you’ll know, the law requires that the person who smokes has to be 15′ away from any building and not 2 or less’. There’s also a meth lab in my neighborhood and they cook in the am so it’s either ammonia fumes or secondhand smoke.”

      The neighborhood meth labs are just an unimportant afterthought compared to the *REAL* problem: The Tobacco Smokers! Amazing, eh?

      – MJM

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.