let it be up to the individual and the business owners about smoking,it is their establishment let them do their own deciding on what goes and doesnt and as far as health issues i have to say im 31 yrs work and have five kids and i never get sick ive been smoking since 11 yrs of age my only vise is my smoking. so health wise it really has to depend on the person doing it , thats where the choice comes in there are many warnings and people know what they are getting into smokers have lost the priviledge of certains health insurances among other things so if it is just about the health risk no one has to worry accept the smoker. so i say unless you are smoking mind your own business this issue has gone on for long enough and smokers already have parents...

Christian, I totally agree with you that tobacco is terrible for you. It is an addiction, like alcohol, and many others. The effects of all are terrible on your body. But That is not what is in question here with the reversal of the ban. It is about ones Freedom to Choose what they do, as long as what they are doing is not against the law. So as long as tobacco and alcohol are legal in the USA there should not be any person, law making body, or anyone else telling those people or businesses where they can smoke or drink,etc. Everyone has the Freedom to choose where to go thats only fair to everyone to make that decision for themselves. It is a question of our Freedoms in this country, we don't need laws passed taking them away. For those that smoke they are not doing anything illegal they are sold in this county and country. There has to be a way for all to get along on this subject, maybe better ventilation, within reason when it comes to cost for the businesses involved, or a separated room, something for all. I am sure there are people that can come up with a way for both to be in same place or just dont go to the places that have smoking or not smoking which ever you wish. But by no means agree to have someone else decide that for you.

To all smokers,

I hope this debate has been helpful to you, personally I really don’t care that you smoke or what your smoking habits are for that matter. As you can see in this blog there are strong feelings on both sides of this issue and you can continue to debate the issues surrounding smoking but this tactic really only diverts the focus away from the real issue and that is your health and the effects of smoking on you.

Unless you have been living under a rock for at least the last 10 years you already know that smoking has many negative effects on your body. You feel them everyday. My only hope is that you will at least think about taking control of your life again and responsibility for your actions.

This addiction drives your life and no one knows that more than you but ultimately you will pay for your addiction in many health issues through out your life.

Think about it!

Christian wrote, "Please at least make an attempt to list some of the reasons! " Sure. The taste for some people, the physical sensation of consciously inhaling and exhaling something a bit different than regular air (think for a moment about the difference between drinking carbonated vs. regular water: the taste isn't all that different: the enjoyment comes from the different sensation on your mouth/throat/mucousal glands and such), watching a person you are with enjoy smoking while at the same time sharing a similar enjoyment yourself, the mild enjoyment of playing with your smoke in various small ways as you exhale it.

All small things, but together, and when combined with the enjoyable stimulus or relaxation engendered by the nicotine, overall enjoyable. Again, think about comparing it to something like drinking coffee: most folks enjoy the caffeine as well as the taste. Many folks enjoy the feeling of hot coffee rather than tepid coffee.

If nicotine were the only aspect of smoking, you wouldn't have seen the vast change to low nicotine cigarettes from the 70s through the 90s (although some smokers did indeed probably "compensate" in various ways), and you'd see a much wider use of NRT products. Note that the currently most popular NRT, the e-cigarette, comes closest to providing a similar experience and sensation, aside from nicotine, to smoking. Note also that although it seems to likely have a "risk" of literally about 1/1,000th that of smoking it has been viciously attacked by the FDA at the pretty obvious behest of the Big Pharma companies that have been pushing smoking bans in favor of their own NicoGummyPatchyProducts.

Things are not as simple and clear as the antismoking advocates would have you believe.

Michael J. McFadden Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

Michael J. McFadden wrote "Smoking is something people enjoy doing for a number of different reasons ..." Please at least make an attempt to list some of the reasons!

Christian wrote, "Let’s be honest, if the nicotine is what your bodies crave, and it is, then why smokers can’t be equally happy with some other delivery method?" Simply because smoking is *not* just about a "drug delivery." Smoking is something people enjoy doing for a number of different reasons, with the stimulus they get from nicotine just being one of them. Cups of coffee and cans of beer are "drug delivery systems" too, but how many folks do you know who'd like to trade in their morning cups or football-game cans for caffeine and alcohol patches?

And before you jump to another topic and say "But those things don't affect others!" think about the 700 volatile and toxic organic chemicals in a cup of coffee, or the carcinogenic and highly volatile alcohol fumes from your neighbor's drinks at a restaurant. See the BMJ "Secondary Smoke, Alcohol, and Deaths" at:

www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/330/7495/812#103642

for more on that. Is it crazy? Sure. But so's worrying about wisps of smoke unless you're working 12 hours a day for forty years straight in a perpetually crowded smoking ban with a broken ventilation system. Heck, in a situation like that you *MIGHT* have about one extra chance in a thousand of eventually getting lung cancer... as long as you're willing to do some statistical juggling to get such an answer.

Michael J. McFadden Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

To S, harleyrider1978, et al,

I agreed with you and you continue to try to rationalize the effects of smoking or compare the result of smoking with other alcohol.

I know, it is hard to think of yourself as a drug dependent person but if you are a smoker that is what you are. Equally difficult is to think of a cigarette as a drug delivery system but that is what a cigarette is.

Let’s be honest, if the nicotine is what your bodies crave, and it is, then why smokers can’t be equally happy with some other delivery method? The fact is, no one would care if you were nicotine addicts of not.

For me, I have first hand life experience of the effects of smoking and smoking’s ultimate result; you will never be able to convince me that smoking is a good thing. I also recognize your rite to smoke your brains out and have fun doing it but you should also recognize the consequence of your actions.

Christian, The health factors may be true, i am sure some of them are, but that isn't what is in question here. I dont like smoke blown in my face either, but that is my decision to sit there or go in someplace with smoke it is not anyone elses right to make that decision for me. A law made to decide for person or a business about what they can or can't do is. It is not up to lawmakers to make that decision, it is up to the individual, as long as it is legal. As long as they sell tobacco, alcohol to those of age it should be allowed. Anywhere that alcohol is allowed tobacco should be allowed. There are health issues related to each. Alcohol causes death to those instantly when a drunk driver is on the road and recks, tabacco doesnt, so if one is banned then both should be banned or none at all. This is where someone else making decisions for an adult about what to do even regarding their health will lead. Of course, the non smoker may enjoy that law to, they can go out and not drink alcohol or be around smoke with the laws they want. Those non smokers fighting for their so called right to breath fresh air should be fighting for an alcohol ban to, and take all adults rights to make decisions from them. Now, does that sound just, I think not. It is not about smoking or not smoking it is about the Freedom to Choose for yourself.

SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor..................thats right water..........you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made......thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons.......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ........they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science......... Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at: .bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057

concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers.....

meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:
Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent " The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: 'There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.' " And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations.

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.)
The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It's not true. .spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997 -harleyrider1978

Other than your rite to choose, tell me one positive thing that smoking does for you? Just one!

Consider this; smokers are generally sick more often, age more rapidly, have a higher incidence of gum disease and tooth loss, always seem to have a cough, have shortness of breath, will develop lung cancer or emphysema eventually, and have higher mortality rate than the population. Oh and your health rates are higher too, yes the insurance companies have known this for years and have millions of data points to prove it.

To all of the smokers, you can argue about your rites but ultimately you are arguing for the rite to destroy hour health in a public forum with a specific form of nicotine delivery that causes others around you to be exposed as well. If you were receiving nicotine with another delivery method, say the patch, gum, etc, no one would know or care.

By the way, nicotine is nicotine regardless of the delivery the only exception is the lungs survive less damage.

So, smoking leads to highly debilitating dieses that will kill you is a very painful manner.

To all the non-smokers, I would encourage you to only spend your money at non-smoking bars, restaurants, and other businesses.

im glad that was abolished it was simply stupid you have the right to quit smoking if you want to if not then dont but bus, were losing alot of money casting out people because of smoking and the issue of communism does come to mind when you do not have a choice smokers do not tell people with cell phones to not use them because of the cancer im sorry but people should always have a choice if you do not want to go to a bar because of smoking go to one that has no smoking there may be very few because a majority of people who drink smoke but thats on you thanks for a fair shake marion county

People that sits in a politcal area and has their own view an doesn't go by the constitution that was written in 1776 that it states that the government any what so ever is supposed to be runned by the people for the people of the people. Also i didn't go to combat just to have bullets flying by me either having being told that I can't do this and can't do that. We are not a communist country like russia.

Way to Go Marion County! Takes alot of guts to make a wrong right good for you. Shows how much you care about our Freedom of Choice and not as much about who you might offend by upholding that right.

Cowards.

LOL MARION COUNTY FOR GOING FORWARD! Backwards would be to make a choice for adults on adult issues.

Pete, you have every right to breath clean air. You also have the right to choose to do it. I don't see where they tried to pass a law to prevent that right. Now you and everyone else 21 and over have the right to choose for yourself. Do you need someone else to make that decision for you, I think not, Choice is yours make it.

LOL Marion County. LOL WV! So backwards.

To "An Asthmatic," If you are truly concerned about "clean air" then I would think you'd be happy that the ban was rescinded. After all, smokers will now be safely back inside the places that allow smoking and you'll never have to encounter them or their smoke at all. The ban moved them out onto the sidewalks and/or around entryways where you were constantly encountering them?

The only people against moving the smokers and their friends back inside of places that opt to allow it are the social engineers - and that's not what America is supposed to be about..

Michael J. McFadden Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

Hey Pete if you open your own bar you are more than welcome to make it non smoking.

It’s a shame, that our elected leaders do not have the courage to lead. It’s a much greater shame that for many people their future only extends to the end of their next cigarette.

Thanks Randy and the Board of Health.I`m free to socialize again!! YAY!!!!!!

Shouldn't be the businesses decision in the long run? Who are any of you to tell someone how their business is to be ran? If I could gain 25% revenue by letting people smoke in my bar or restaurant you better believe I would. You are not only deciding whether or not smoking should be allowed but the business practices and revenue. The one or two restaurants who keep their buildings smoke free will probably do much better for themselves too. If you are allergic to smoke eat at home. If I was allergic to perfume and cologne, would I try to ban people from wearing it? NO! I would just stay away from people who used it. If you are allergic to smoke there is a deeper rooted problem and you should try to figure out what it is instead of just coping with it. Besides when it comes down to it if smoking causes a place to lose profit they will ban it themselves. .This thing about clean air is a joke, spend 10 minutes behind a semi on the freeway or burn a bag of charcoal on the grill and guess what? You just smoked a carton of cigarettes. Why don't you just start smoking that way it won't bother you. Or better yet those who vote against the smoking can pay a special tax to make up for the projected profit loss from the businesses, now how would you vote?

its not about if smoking is bad for your health,its the way they made it a law.remember they have to go by the law too.

Joedogs, What about our freedom to have clean air? We should have that right even in a bar.

If the decision was not political in nature and the vote to recind was strictly to adhere to State Ethics Commissions rules and regulations because the ban was not on the agenda, then why is there no mention of revisiting the ban, placing it on an upcoming agenda and setting it for a vote?

Would that then make it a political issue, thus making the Commission cowards who would rather shelve an issue as important as clean air than risk angering smokers?

John Conway, thank you for casting the correct vote on this issue.

Our country is run by lobbiest of the tobacco and pharmacutical and insurance companies, so I guess it stands to reason that our county will be run by the smokers who are so intent on killing themselves $5 packs at a time that they can't see the health benefits to CLEAN AIR.

Thanks Marion County Commission. Thanks a lot. Again, if I want to frequent places similar to those that were once made clean by this ban, then I guess I'll have to leave the county. Just like I have to do to accomplish any decent shopping.

a bar is a place where you expect smoking. i am all for the ban in restaurants and public places. i have a daughter allergic to smoke, especially cigarettes. but a bar is an adult place and smoking is expected.

No, it's not a sad day for the people or the so-called ethics commission (give me a break) or anything else. It's a great day for the people and a great day for freedom from tyranny. Talk about health if you will, there's nothing wrong with that. But let's keep our eye on freedom. Remember that nonsense about "Mountaineers Are Always Free?" Well, let's keep our eyes on it and never let it go. Haven't you hayseeds had enough of tyranny? How much more do you want? Do you want to be regulated the way they are in Massachusetts and New York? Will you never have any respect for your state motto? Does anybody even know what it is? Will you give up every freedom your forefathers ever fought to preserve for you?