Streams

New York City Considers Public Smoking Ban

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Health advocates and smokers' rights activists spoke out about a bill to ban smoking in outdoor locations like public parks, beaches and pedestrian plazas in New York City.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Councilwoman Gail Brewer of the Upper West Side are among the bill’s sponsors. The ban aims to reduce the effects of secondhand smoke on New Yorkers and to reduce cigarette-related litter.

“Our public parks and plazas are one of the few places in the city where we can still go to enjoy fresh air,” Manhattan Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez said.

Some council members hope the ban will decrease smoking rates as well as prevent younger generations from ever adopting the habit.

“It's about making sure that youth and children do not see bad role models, people smoking in parks and they do not have to deal with the bad effects of cigarette smoke,” Queens Councilman Daniel Dromm said.

But smokers’ right activists and other opponents of the bill say the ban would infringe on their rights, especially when they pay taxes that support the city’s parks and other public spaces.

“It's a tool to make it so difficult to light up, that people will quit in frustration. That is none of the government's business when we're talking about a legal behavior,” said Audrey Silk, a former New York City police officer who lives in Brooklyn.

Councilman Peter Vallone Jr. has proposed a compromise on the ban. Under his plan, there would be separate smoking sections in parks that are larger than two acres, and smoking would still be allowed in pedestrian plazas.

But Scott Santarella, who runs the American Lung Association in New York, says no compromise is necessary.

“We're not taking away the right for someone to smoke; we're actually asking them to be conscious of not smoking around others, that impacts them from a health perspective. They can still smoke in their car, in their home, we're just asking them not to smoke in public places,” he said.

Other cities like San Francisco, Salt Lake City and Albuquerque are among the 470 municipalities that currently have smoking bans in parks, and several cities across the country also prohibit smoking on beaches.

The Council's Health Committee will likely vote on the proposal later this month.

Tags:

More in:

The Morning Brief

Enter your email address and we’ll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.

Comments [21]

efthimia demetriadis from BROOKLYN

WHY DON'T THEY REVEAL THE NAMES OF THE POLITICIANS WHO VOTED FOR THIS BAN? ARE THEY AFRAID OF NOT GETTING VOTED INTO THE GOVERNMENT AGAIN? ALL THIS BAN IS FOR MORE MONEY & NOT OUR HEALTH.I GUESS ONLY NON-SMOKERS HAVE RIGHTS, MR. BLOOMBERG. NEXT ELECTION ALL SMOKERS SHOULD BAN THEIR VOTES.

Feb. 07 2011 12:50 AM
Franz Klammer from 10461

I stopped smoking when I touched down @ JFK (form Europe, 6 years ago, after 15 y of heavy smoking) and am therefore about as fascist as it gets with non-smoking... However, I find the land of the free should rediscover some of their freedoms. The speaker's health argument with their sentinel substance (47%? US vs 52%? in NYC) is utter nonsense since the speaker should have at least compared urban areas among each other! Second hand smoke on Time square as a health hazard - what are they thinking? There will be an anti-Democratic backlash since that fits exactly the Republican narrative of the overreaching nanny-state. Mrs. Speaker please go take care of your own children. Bloomie, don't sign this!

Feb. 03 2011 12:12 PM
Nick from UWS

I think this is beyond outrageous. What is this police state nonsense?

Are they going to deny the hard working people of New York a quiet cigarette or cigar in the park after a hard day's work? That's what they would do, is it? They're going to send squads of cops into Times Square and ticket every European tourist who's smoking a cigarette? Way to go Michael Bloomberg, you hopeless hick. Making the city so welcoming to adults with this infantile nonsense. This is not your job Bloomberg.

This is NEW YORK CITY. Who are these meddling nobodys to poke their noses into the lives of the hard working and tax paying adults of this city? The parks and streets belong to the people; we pay for them. I'll smoke anywhere I god**mn f***king well please.

Feb. 03 2011 11:29 AM
gene from NYC

>>Just a reminder.... I'm still waiting for Councilman Dromm or Brewer to define . . . . Or for Councilman Rodriguez to explain . . . Antismokers never answer . . .

Disregarding the false "antismokers" shibboleth: Of course not. No normal human who has, you know, _things to do_ will. Take time out of one's busy life to "debate" with some kooky book salesman out flaming websites wholesale on the internet? Why??

I for one thank god our city council people don't waste their time engaging in lunacy instigated by out-of-state online campaigners like McFadden. If our city council started "debating" Flat Earth issues with modern-day Charles K. Johnsons, yow! It'd be a sure sign they've gone coo-coo!

Let this character direct the discussion? Hah. I repeat: "still, still--after 14,000 links, all that spamming, all that branding, all that _hard work_-- STILL no one pays him a bit of mind?"

No, no one does, not that it matters to him; this guy will go on indefinitely. He's been at it 25 years, he says, and with spectacularly null results. No one in the world pays any attention to him. Yet on he spams, day and night, no end in sight, he's always right. All of medical science can't convince him. So what chance of rational discussion has any mere mortal against a diehard fanatic who spends his lifetime spewing his pet theories all over the internet? To even try would clearly be as Sisyphean a task as arguing with Charles K.

Especially when you take into account the slimy, manipulative tricks and techniques McF has so shamelessly deployed right here in this discussion.

Oh, and let's add another. Just a reminder . . . come back to an out-of-state message board 3 months later so you can get in the last word(!) No reason for his posting whatsoever, it simply copy/pastes what's been said before _for a 3rd time_. The posting's real purpose is to direct attention away from the actual subject we've been talking about: his own scurrilous behavior.

Feb. 03 2011 05:42 AM
Michael J. McFadden from Philadelphia

Just a reminder....

I'm still waiting for Councilman Dromm or Brewer to define the "bad effects of cigarette smoke" on children in parks. Or for Councilman Rodriguez to explain just how the parks are one of the "few places" to go for clean air since he's thrown smokers out of virtually every bar, restaurant, club, pool hall, and other businesses in the city. Or to explain why they don't take the simplest and most foolproof way to reduce 90% of the cigarette litter in the city: simply allow businesses to designate comfortable, separately ventilated indoor areas with ashtrays for their smoking employees and customers.

Of course Antismokers never answer these or any other similar questions.

- MJM

Jan. 29 2011 10:00 PM
Gene from NYC

It's the Season of the Witch, all right, where once-traditional values and a basic sense of decency are turned upside down, where convicted mass murderers can plead with a straight face, "But Judge, that cop who caught me is a nut!"

Pay attention, Communications Majors, this is how you do rehabilitative PR, how you try to leave the impression, despite a mountain of incriminating evidence, that your client is Honor Incarnate, how you work to bury his wrongdoing with PR tricks, herding unsuspecting readers away from the crime scene and corralling them over to _your_ agenda. Clever and cynical.

Because McF's got nothin'. No excuse, however lame. No slinking away, like any self-respecting thief caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Faced with the incontrovertible facts of his despicable behavior, how does he defend himself? With smears and name-calling, of course.

>>I owe a message board an apology for dragging along a rather raging antismoking anti-sycophant.

He apologizes for me(!), creepy boy. (For being against obsequious flattery??) Oh, he owes this board an apology, all right; in fact, he should get down on his knees and beg forgiveness not only from this board but from all the webmasters whose sites he has hijacked, all the local residents he has abused in his flood-the-internet campaign to promote himself and his book (specifics below).

Then he wonders why no one answers him. He's of interest, all right, but not as the acclaimed scientist he affects, but as the unconscionable warlord waging a modern day PR Blitzkrieg, his spamming tanks crushing the horses of websites' outdated defenses.

But still, still--after 14,000 links, all that spamming, all that branding, all that _hard work_-- STILL no one pays him a bit of mind?

That's because McF is today's Charles K. Johnson, who seldom got an answer to his challenges either, not even when he said,

"Wherever you find people with a great reservoir of common sense, they don't believe idiotic things such as the earth spinning around the sun. Reasonable, intelligent people have always recognized that the earth is flat!"

Johnson too never lost an argument in his own mind, and he too never got an inch of serious attention.

But at least he didn't hijack message boards to gain it.

Oct. 27 2010 10:44 PM
Michael J. McFadden from Philadelphia

Well, it looks like once again I owe a message board an apology for dragging along a rather raging antismoking anti-sycophant. I've never minded antismokers debating me about the topics on news boards: that's what they're for. But unfortunately I have no control over the nuts. Sorry!

I'm still waiting for Councilman Dromm or Brewer to define the "bad effects of cigarette smoke" on children in parks. Or for Councilman Rodriguez to explain just how the parks are one of the "few places" to go for clean air since he's thrown smokers out of virtually every bar, restaurant, club, pool hall, and other businesses in the city. Or to explain why they don't take the simplest and most foolproof way to reduce 90% of the cigarette litter in the city: simply allow businesses to designate comfortable, separately ventilated indoor areas with ashtrays for their smoking employees and customers.

Of course Antismokers never answer these or any other similar questions.

Wonder why?

Michael J. McFadden, who spent his first 18 years growing up in Park Slope... :>

A man who will keep his mysterious hidden interest in all of this buried deeply away so that folks will have to search high 'n low for it. Of course they'll still have an easier time finding it than being able to pin down pseudo-anonymous nutcases! LOL!

Oct. 25 2010 06:34 PM
gene from NYC

>>Gene manages to talk about my book a half dozen times while I had mentioned it only once: as a potential competing interest in my first signature

Yes, I saw that mention. In his list of "potential competing interests," it was a comma-and-space before "Park Slope expatriate." Oh, that troublesome Park Slope "competing interest." Watch out, Flatbush!

That said, I've lived in a lot of places, but I wouldn't go on the Commercial-Appeal's website and smarmily try to ingratiate myself by signing, "former Memphis resident." Well, not unless I wanted to make a pretense to being local wherever possible.

McF compares my mentions of his book to his single mention of it, but there's a difference: McF irrevocably _branded_ WNYC's poor hide with his book title; the raised scar is now quickly and easily found. Go ahead, try a search of his title--AND WNYC. He thinks New Yorkers are stupid, that we are oblivious to the basic tenets of marketing?

The reality is, McF has no real answer, no excuse for being a spammer, just a spurious whine that he's being painted as one. Painted?? The evidence is right here, plain as day, no trip to Pergament necessary. You can't hide it with a disingenuous cry of "I been framed!" Geez, the last time I saw such arrantly obtuse word- and idea-play was Ahmadinejad at the U.N.

McF injects himself into a conversation, and then, control freak, demands control of the conversation. But just as when a group of friends in the park is suddenly accosted by some spittle-spewing interloper breaking into their conversation to offer up his "insights," it's the invader's self-injection itself that becomes the topic. Especially when they've seen him do the same thing to other groups all over the lawn, all over the city. And most especially if he's always carrying a few books under his arm that just happen to be for sale.

But no matter how much I talk about his book, I could never match his own 14,000 links (and counting). He doesn't have to directly plug his book, that would be too obvious now that he knows webmasters are on to him--which may also be the reason that here on WNYC he has stifled his tendency to post links to his own sites, and/or to sites from which his is just a link away.

Oct. 23 2010 05:02 PM
gene from NYC

>>Gene manages to talk about my book a half dozen times while I had mentioned it only once: as a potential competing interest in my first signature

Yes, I saw that mention. In his list of "potential competing interests," it was a comma-and-space before "Park Slope expatriate." Oh, that troublesome Park Slope "competing interest." Watch out, Flatbush!

That said, I've lived in a lot of places, but I wouldn't go on the Commercial-Appeal's website and smarmily try to ingratiate myself by signing, "former Memphis resident." Well, not unless I wanted to make a pretense to being local wherever possible.

McF compares my mentions of his book to his single mention of it, but there's a difference: McF irrevocably _branded_ WNYC's poor hide with his book title; the raised scar is now quickly and easily found. Go ahead, try a search of his title--AND WNYC. He thinks New Yorkers are stupid, that we are oblivious to the basic tenets of marketing?

The reality is, McF has no real answer, no excuse for being a spammer, just a spurious whine that he's being painted as one. Painted?? The evidence is right here, plain as day, no trip to Pergament necessary. You can't hide it with a disingenuous cry of "I been framed!" Geez, the last time I saw such arrantly obtuse word- and idea-play was Ahmadinejad at the U.N.

McF injects himself into a conversation, and then, control freak, demands control of the conversation. But just as when a group of friends in the park is suddenly accosted by some spittle-spewing interloper breaking into their conversation to offer up his "insights," it's the invader's self-injection itself that becomes the topic. Especially when they've seen him do the same thing to other groups all over the lawn, all over the city. And most especially if he's always carrying a few books under his arm that just happen to be for sale.

But no matter how much I talk about his book, I could never match his own 14,000 links (and counting). He doesn't have to directly plug his book, that would be too obvious now that he knows webmasters are on to him--which may also be the reason that here on WNYC he has stifled his tendency to post links to his own sites, and/or to sites from which his is just a link away.

Oct. 23 2010 05:00 PM
GENE from NYC

I've seen him post on a hapless college's board:

1) at least 4 links to his sites--but the links are sans the http://;

2) He then accompanied a link to one of his emissions with the pointed commentary, "You might need to add the htp thingie in front of that. I don't think it's allowed here" (shades of his NYPost msg; and best of all, his clever "htp" won't raise the "http" alarm amongst webmasters);

3) and then denies that he's marketing. All with a straight face.

That board's terms of service state,

"You shall not . . . use the Site, . . . in any manner that is, attempts to, or is likely to: . . . be used for commercial or business purposes, including, without limitation, advertising, marketing or offering goods or services, whether or not for financial or any other form of compensation or through linking with any other website or web pages"

So maybe he's trying harder to stay clean these days; he hasn't pulled those shenanigans here. But remove those tools from his arsenal, and it's even more urgent that McF _brand_ each and every site. And he has achieved that on every site he touches, thousands of times, WNYC not excluded. And he won't stop, using everything in his PR magician's bag of tricks to find all sorts of tortured Ahmadinejad-esque excuses to keep spamming, keep marketing, keep branding.

After all, his business and apparently desperate self-promotion depend on it.

Oct. 23 2010 04:59 PM
Michael J. McFadden from Philadelphia

As usual, Gene manages to talk about my book a half dozen times while I had mentioned it only once: as a potential competing interest in my first signature. And also as usual, rather than post on the topic of the board, Gene continues a campaign to paint those who fight against smoking bans as spammers promoting books, ventilation companies, big tobacco or whatever in hopes of convincing potentially gullible webmasters to cut off debate.

The topic here of course, as I posted on below, is the outdoor smoking ban and the hypocrisy of antismoking groups in trumpeting the "freedom" of smokers to still smoke "in their car, in their homes" while they are simultaneously trying to remove those freedoms in other venues.

Now if Councilman Dromm and others like him want to start proposing this law and others purely on the basis of "It's about making sure that youth and children do not see bad role models" then that's fine although I might disagree with it. After all, there are a lot of "bad role model" behaviors and styles that some folks might prefer their impressonable children see. But when they move into the "bad effects" of outdoor smoke, that's a different ball of wax altogether. Studies have been done showing that smoke *exists* outdoors, but none have been done showing any "bad effects" from it.

- MJM

Oct. 20 2010 08:05 AM
gene from NYC

>>every message I ever post is . . . solidly on-topic

And that's what I'm talking about: McFadden's solid, consistent topic, the clear, overriding message he posts every single time he injects himself onto a local board to "inform" the hapless locals: BUY MY BOOK.

McFadden challenges WNYC listeners to argue with him. Think he'll ever lose one of these arguments? Well of course he does--but not in his own mind. After all, his business depends on it, so he'll never give an inch. Non-stop arguing is his profession, and his marketing plan. All that online arguing adds up to more chances to plug his book and make a name for himself.

WNYC and its listeners have a right to know when they are the target of a nationwide PR campaign.

There's this weird cabal of maybe 7 or 8 spammers who, along with McF, flood message boards with their BS; and locals, if they can get a word in edgewise, are blasted before they realize they've gotten themselves mixed up with semi-pros. Google McFadden, marbee (or marleneb) and magnetic. And that's just those with consistent names. There are sites and networks that alert pro-smoking fanatics to go out and flood innocent message boards. On at least one, activists worldwide were urged to skew an important residents-only online poll in Biddeford, ME. For a Texas poll, they were also supplied the proper zip code to register with.

14,000 links for McFadden's book. I've never heard of any real author doing this kind of message-board-placement PR. Too cheap and tawdry. Imagine if every would-be "author" copied McFadden PR mission. Imagine how useless message boards will be once Global Warming Deniers, Tea Partiers, and other activists get on their hobby horses and flood local boards.

WNYC's boards would no longer be the wonderful places they are, where ordinary New Yorkers chat, usually intelligently, about issues. WNYC's boards would become what this one has become --merely the despoiled target of unscrupulous, self-serving activist spammers. And book salesmen.

If I managed a message board I'd be furious that this handful of hard-core fanatics, this shabby cabal, would come in from out of town to overwhelm my board and abuse my readers with their ongoing, never-ending nationwide PR campaign.

Oct. 20 2010 06:51 AM
Magnum1 from Stoton WI

Bloomberg should be impeached for using a public office to enforce his personal beliefs onto the public. Is this guy for real. How can he get away with his anger towards cigarette smokers and the poor people in this city. Maybe sombody should take away some things that he enjoys to teach him a lesson in humanity.

Oct. 19 2010 01:36 AM
Michael J. McFadden from Philadelphia

Gene, anyone who reads my offerings on message boards will immediately see how silly your campaign on this is. I usually identify myself and my potential "competing interest" openly (unlike you) and generally only do so in my signature line once in a while so I can't be accused of hiding it. Meanwhile they'll also see that virtually every message I ever post is not only solidly on-topic but also usually offers some level of new information or argument that advances the communication on the board about the topic at hand.

You've been doing this for 25 years Gene. The least you could do is occasionally admit your own "competing interests." Btw, I believe Alexa ratings are driven by links -- did you notice any links in my entry below? The only time I provide links to people is when those links specifically offer information to the point of the discussion.

Meanwhile, let me repeat my point about the hypocrisy of the Antismokers in stating that people are still free to smoke in their homes and their cars while at the same time working hard to take that freedom away.

- MJM

Oct. 18 2010 05:37 PM

From WNYC's Terms of Service:

* The Service can only be used for non-commercial purposes. You cannot distribute or otherwise publish any material containing any solicitation of funds, advertising or solicitation for goods and services.

Google McFadden's book, and you'll find over 14,000 links(!) many if not most from his own message board postings.

Oh, he couches it in language that may fool some sites. He shoots out some pseudo-scientific flak to make it seem as if it's not an ad, but essentially yes, this constant, unrelenting posting is an ad campaign with one overriding message: BUY THIS BOOK. It's the consistent subject spammed onto websites around the world.

Recently, McF deliberately subverted the NY Post's anti-URL policy to flog his link, baldly writing, "I don't think links are allowed here, but if you go to Google and enter the word Antibrains you will quickly find a web site that includes excerpts from my book."

You'll also find how to buy it.

And you'll see its Alexa ratings--increased everytime an innocent, naive site like WNYC posts a McFadden message.

Oct. 18 2010 10:03 AM
Magnetic

Maybe some small pockets of space can be allocated in parks (appropriately cordoned off, of course) for hypochondriacs, phobics, somatizers, the easily brainwashed, bigots, megalomaniacs – we can call it the “Public Health Area” (proudly sponsored by Bloomberg and his staff of fascist misfits).

Oct. 15 2010 06:57 PM
Magnetic

Be aware that smoker denormalization/persecution, and indoor/outdoor smoking bans were planned in the 1970s (see The Godber Blueprint http://www.rampant-antismoking.com ) under the auspices of the World Health Organization (WHO). Much “evidence” over the last three decades has been concocted to fit the agenda. At this time, most countries have signed onto the WHO’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control not knowing (maybe they do?) that the WHO (a globalist entity) couldn’t care less about local issues or national sovereignty. It couldn’t care less if the pub trade went completely under. It couldn’t care less if smokers were reduced to criminals. The WHO’s only interest is in advancing the eugenics agenda of the “smokefree world”.

Antismoking is not new. It has a long, sordid history. It is typically exterminatory. The fanatical mentality does not entertain accommodation or compromise. Its only intent is the eradication of tobacco use. As such it is dictatorial/tyrannical in disposition. In promoting its fanatical, extreme view, antismoking typically degenerates – quickly – into a plethora of inflammatory lies that drive irrational belief, fear and hatred – particularly amongst nonsmokers: The inflammatory lies produce a bigotry “bandwagon effect” that wreaks social havoc.

Following is a link considering the antismoking crusade (also eugenics-driven) of early-1900s USA. This crusade pre-dates even the pretense of a scientific basis or the idea of secondhand smoke “danger”. It was based on a multitude of inflammatory lies that made criminals of ordinary people.
http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1981/2/1981_2_94_print.shtml

Antismoking reared its ugly head again in the Nazi regime. Nazism was also eugenics-based and a continuation/extremizing of American eugenics.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2352989/pdf/bmj00571-0040.pdf

From the article above, statements such as “Some council members hope the ban will decrease smoking rates as well as prevent younger generations from ever adopting the habit” and “It's about making sure that youth and children do not see bad role models” are eugenics directives, having nothing to do with “protecting” non-smokers from ambient smoke. America has over a century-long history of eugenics and crypto-eugenics (eugenics by other names).

There is more than ample evidence that the antismoker mentality is fanatical (delusional) and psychologically/socially/morally toxic.

Oct. 15 2010 06:39 PM

I am a non-smoker and breathed a sigh of relief when bars became smoke free but think this is a step too far. Second-hand smoke outdoors? What nonsense - it's outdoors! I would like to know how many of these people supporting this drive instead of using public transport or drive SUVs. Their tail-pipes do more harm than a kid having a puff ten-plus feet away from me in park. But most of all I resent the fact that so many already-stretched-too-thin resources are going into this. The amount of time and taxpayers money spent pushing this proposal through and enforcing it is offensive. These roads to nowhere must stop!

Oct. 15 2010 02:47 PM
healthy new york from nyc

Mayor Bloomberg shows a lot of courage to stand up against the smoking lobby, big business and an industry directly responsible for so much suffering, death and costly medical treatments. Smoking is dangerous to everyone, and should be illegal PERIOD. It's also more disgusting than most smokers would admit in their smoke addicted haze.

Oct. 15 2010 10:54 AM
Michael J. McFadden from Philadelphia

This article did a wonderful job showcasing the antismoking mindset. It talks twice of the ban reducing cigarette litter but never mentions that 90% of that litter was a direct result of smokers being thrown to the streets by Bloomberg's earlier ban. It also talks twice about "the bad effects" of smoke while never noting there's never yet been a study showing any "bad effects" from outdoor smoking -- there've been studies measuring the fact that smoke exists outdoors but nothing showing "bad effects" from it because they simply don't exist outside of the minds of a few sad neurotics. It then quotes a councilman saying parks are one of the "few places" to enjoy fresh air -- conveniently forgetting all the bars, strip clubs, and near 100% of other other offices and buildings where fresh air was demanded by the previous ban. . . . . . . . .

To add icing on the cake the Lung Association chief notes people can still smoke in their cars and homes while failing to note that antismoking groups have been quite actively pushing for car bans and apartment bans. . . . . . . . . As noted, the article is an absolutely wonderful showcase of antismoking doublethink and Ms. Silks observation that the ban is simply designed to make it difficult to smoke was shown to be true by Bloomberg himself in September when he committed the city to "make it as difficult and as expensive to smoke as we possibly can." . . . . . . . .

Smoking bans are bad laws based upon lies and propaganda. They should be fought and resisted every step of the way. . . . . . . . .

Michael J. McFadden,
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains," Park Slope ex-patriate

Oct. 15 2010 02:35 AM
marbee from Wisconsin

Today America is still under attack, but not only by unknown jihads flying planes into buildings or blowing themselves up along with innocents in buildings, shopping centers and trains, etc., but more so by the American media, Tobacco Control and the pharmaceutical industry and our lackey government under their control. I’ve seen this world go bonkers over the years. Freedom is nothing like it used to be. Every time something happens, a law is passed. There is nothing called personal responsibility anymore because parental autonomy has been diminished. If a kid drowns in a pool, it’s the pool’s fault. If an adult gets cancer, it’s a smoker’s fault. If someone is overweight, it’s McDonald’s fault. Special interest has jumped into the fray too many times with the “answer”, their drugs, to “save” us from ourselves, and force our veterans out into the cold to smoke and take property rights from business owners. Our citizens are demonized for their choice to use a legal product that was once commonplace before the production of Chantix, Nicorette, and Nicoderm. The overweight are demonized since the invention of bariatric surgery and sugar replacements. Common sense isn’t good enough anymore, the incompetent politicians have seen to it. How long before they TAKE kids because the parents smoke?

Oct. 14 2010 11:55 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Sponsored

Latest Newscast

 

 

Support

WNYC is supported by the Charles H. Revson Foundation: Because a great city needs an informed and engaged public

Feeds

Supported by