Click here to view La Crosse Area Weather
Home > News > Story
 Advertisement 

SECTION SPONSORS


Published - Monday, June 05, 2006

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (170 comment(s))

Gundersen, Franciscan Skemp to make campuses smoke-free by Jan. 1
By TERRY RINDFLEISCH | La Crosse Tribune

.
La Crosse’s two medical centers have decided to make their entire grounds smoke-free next year, while other La Crosse businesses are looking at similar changes.

Officials at Gundersen Luth-eran and Franciscan Skemp will announce today at a joint press conference that employees, patients and their families may no longer smoke outside on their grounds starting Jan. 1.
Logistics Health Inc., will also have a smoke-free campus effective August or September, and Western Technical College will have a smoke-free campus sometime next year.

Dr. Thomas Grau, a Franciscan Skemp physician leader, said the smoke-free campus initiative is especially important for the two medical centers because they are leaders in health promotion.

“Allowing smoking on campus has been a disservice to our employees and visitors,” Grau said. “People have complained a long time about the cloud of smoke they must go through to get in our buildings.”

Smoking would be banned on grounds of all Franciscan Skemp affiliated clinics and hospitals, including Onalaska, Arcadia, Sparta, Tomah, Prairie du Chien and Galesville in Wisconsin, Caledonia and Houston in Minnesota, and Waukon in Iowa.

Dr. Todd Mahr, a Gundersen Lutheran physician leader, said Gundersen Lutheran’s campuses in La Crosse and Onalaska would go smoke-free Jan. 1, but other affiliated clinics and hospitals would have until the end of 2007 to develop a smoke-free campus plan.

“We want our regional facilities to see what they can do in their communities to get other businesses on board, so it’s more of a communitywide initiative like it is in La Crosse,” Mahr said.

“This is a health issue, and it always has been,” he said. “La Crosse has been in the forefront of smoke-free issues in Wisconsin, and we want to be a model for citizens and other communities.”

Mahr said 75 percent of people don’t smoke and should not have to be exposed to smoke when coming to a clinic or hospital.

“Exposure to second-hand smoke is a big issue, and we get complaints from people all the time,” he said. “A smoke-free campus is the right thing to do for everybody’s health.”

Both medical centers have had smoke-free buildings since the early 1990s, but they established designated smoking areas outside. Mahr said Dr. Jeff Thompson, Gundersen Lutheran’s CEO, had asked him and other physician leaders to consider a smoke-free campus plan last year.

“People were smoking all over the place, and not just in designated areas,” Mahr said. “We said, ‘Why not do it as a community effort.’”

At today’s press conference, officials from University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, Viterbo University, Western Technical College, the city of La Crosse and La Crosse County will discuss their plans. They are part of the La Crosse Area Smokefree Campus Alliance Committee.

Pete Eide, Hillview Health Care Center administrator, will talk about Hillview’s experience as a smokefree campus for 3½ years.

Eide said Hillview residents and employees wanted a smoke-free campus. He said numerous employees have quit smoking since the campus went smoke-free.

Viterbo does not allow smoking in its buildings, but has permitted smoking on campus. In the fall, Viterbo will allow smoking only in outside designated areas. UW-L, the city of La Crosse and La Crosse County, which forbid smoking in their buildings, are considering smoke-free campuses.

Grau said the two La Crosse medical centers learned from St. Paul Regions Health System’s smoke-free campus experiences. He said medical centers in Wausau and Eau Claire also are implementing smoke-free campuses.

“We have found that people overwhelmingly favor a smokefree campus,” Grau said. “There will be challenges with this new policy, and we’re not going to beat up anybody for smoking. We’re going to work with employees, patients and their families.”

Both medical centers have provided smoking cessation programs and nicotine replacement products to their employees. Grau and Mahr said patients and their families will be offered nicotine replacement products to help them. They said about 15 percent of employees at the two medical centers are smokers.

“We will support people to make healthy choices,” Mahr said.

Terry Rindfleisch can be reached at trindfleisch@lacrossetribune.com, or (608) 791-8227.
.
 Advertisement 
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

HEY TMK-FROM SMOKER wrote on Jun 12, 2006 9:10 AM:

" Would'nt it be nice,if people WOULD read our posts,and actually READ them? Maybe,all the smokers like us should ban together and show the non-smokers,that we are telling the truth :)! "

criminal wrote on Jun 11, 2006 10:11 AM:

" Actually, I work for the Dept. of Defense, supporting our nation's fighting men and women worldwide. I'm currently in Korea for the summer. And, yeah, "mopes" was a bit harsh on my part. I chose the handle "criminal," because I haven't seen that handle on here, and also because it's a news site and certain words simply catch the eye faster than others. This is one of them. "

TMK wrote on Jun 10, 2006 5:20 PM:

" To: to tmk: You have the right to not believe me that I do ask, but I truly do. I am a lot like "SMOKER who wrote on June 10, 2006 8:46 AM". There are smokers who do respect others. I am sorry that you seem to have never met any of us. "

SMOKER wrote on Jun 10, 2006 8:46 AM:

" "I'm a smoker,(PLEASE hear me out,before you start to bash me).I am one of the (many unknown) smokers,who DO respect the non-smokers.Why??? Because, I do realize that it is MY habit,My choice to do so,and I take responsibility for it. I co-own a business,make good money,have nice vehicles,pay my (higher) insurance premimums,don't throw my butts out the window,don't smoke around those that are non-smokers,(unless I ask first if it will bother them,and I pretty much know who they are,but,if I'm unsure I do ask first),don't smoke where I'm not supposed to,don't smoke around children,etc. I'm not perfect, but ,I give RESPECT to others,on alot of levels,not just smoking,and they in turn respect me on all levels.Thats how to get along. I ask, that,the generalization of smokers,STOP. We are NOT ALL,scum sucking,butt throwing,disrespectful,jerks,just as NOT all fat people are lazy,NOT all blondes are dumb,etc. Thank You!" "

Carrie S wrote on Jun 10, 2006 1:05 AM:

" I too am a GundersenLutheran employee, a non-smoker and applaude the decision to make GL a smoke-free facility. I walk in and out of work everyday through the smell of "The Butt Hut". I'm also a patient at GL. After a recent office visit, I was one a 7 or 8 people in line waiting to check out because only 1 Patient Liaison (receptionist) was at the check out area. After a few minutes, 3 more PLs came in - from a smoke break! Smoking clearly interfered with patient care and has no place in, at or around a medical facility. GL is a healthcare facility and needs to set the standard in the community. "

Gundersen employee wrote on Jun 9, 2006 11:13 PM:

" I work at Gundersen and am a smoker. I don't agree with making the campus smoke-free. I believe that visitors of patients as well as employees should have the right to smoke OUTSIDE in designated smoking areas. I don't agree with people smoking right by the entrances, but I wouldn't see a problem if they were away from the non-smokers. Instead of making it a totally smoke-free campus, why can't we just try to be more strict about where people smoke. That way, everybody would be happy... "

Big John wrote on Jun 9, 2006 2:33 PM:

" Establishments like Gundersen Lutheran reserve the right to implement policy... it's that simple. This isn't smoker vs. non-smoker. Gundersen Lutheran is hospital for crying out loud. It makes sense for them to implement a smoke-free environment. "

Patriot to Johnny A. wrote on Jun 9, 2006 1:52 PM:

" Insurance premiums are based upon POTENTIAL RISK. Many smokers pay higher premiums comensurate with the higher risk they pose. Also, on average smokers cost insurers LESS money over their lifespan than the average non smoker. Once you have health insurance, you can't be exluded because you get old and require a great amount of care. And as far as government expenditures same thing. Compare a smoker who dies of a massive heart attack at age 59 to a some 20 year retired person at age 85. Compare the costs associated with each over the life of each. Your "smokers cost everyone else more" is not true Johhny. I suggest YOU look into the stats, probably even your own comapny has, into this. I invite everyone to do so. Don't take mine (or Johhny's) word for it one way or the other. "

A wrote on Jun 9, 2006 12:53 PM:

" Good for them, it's their business they should be able to make it smoke free! Two thumbs up "

COUGH COUGH wrote on Jun 9, 2006 12:35 PM:

" Okay, let's say any one can smoke anywhere they want. The trouble then is what gives smokers the right to throw their cigarette butts on the ground, or out their car windows and grind their smokes out on the side of a building... smoking must cause damage, not only to the body but also to their respect for the land,community,friends and last but not least their family. If their is one smoker out their who has not tossed their cigarette other than the ash tray, may I say with a smirk... you are a liar. This is litering, polute the air polute the land... ya I guess you smokers deserve a fair shake, NOT ! "

Johnny A. wrote on Jun 9, 2006 12:23 PM:

" To Patriot: Do you work in health insurance? I do, and suggest you do some research on how health insurance really works. Also, smoking-related illnesses are SELF-INFLICTED, unlike many other high-cost illnesses. If you don't think that everyone in society pays the price for smokers (health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid), then you live in a fantasy world. "

Patriot to Johnny A. wrote on Jun 9, 2006 12:08 PM:

" A non smoker with lung cancer can easily cost far more than premiums paid in. Same with a non smoker with kidney failure, a non smoker stroke victim, and the list goes on. You have smokers and non smokers who's premiums will be less than their benefits claimed over time, and you will have some of both groups who exceed it. That's how insurance works! If a smoker totals his car are you going to claim that he unfairly made other auto insurance customers pay more in premiums than they had too? For being someone who supposedly works in insurance, you seem to have a pretty poor grasp. "

to tmk wrote on Jun 9, 2006 11:47 AM:

" I do consider it my loss. However, if a grandmother or aunt can't stop smoking to see their grandchildren or nephews and neices not to mention son and brother well I consider that to be the greatest loss. I am selfish when it comes to my children's health and my own. Call me selfish all you like it is true. dave "

Johnny A. wrote on Jun 9, 2006 11:08 AM:

" To Patriot: A smoker with lung cancer can easily cost an insurance company a $100,000 or more in treatment. How many individual smokers pay that kind of extra premium? The insurance company passes on the extra cost to EVERYONE! "

Smoking parents are selfish wrote on Jun 9, 2006 10:49 AM:

" To the person who responded to 'to tmk', a child of a smoker who is affected by smoke should not be condemned for not visiting a smoking parent's home. Yes, it's the mother's house, but if the smoke is affecting her adult children (or grandchildren), those children shouldn't be called selfish for not wanting to feel sick. "

Patriot to Johnny A. wrote on Jun 9, 2006 10:28 AM:

" It matters little if it is accounted apart after the insurer gets all the premium money or if its before that at the employer level, because the price the insurer charges the employers in total has it figured in. The price the employer is charged by the insurer is based upon the health/health needs of its participants. The employer pays a higher price to the insurer if many of the participants are smokers, compared to less cost if there were no smokers. That "more" is collected in the form of higher premiums for smokers by the employer, to cover the higher cost charged them by the insurer. So you see even if the insurer is just looking at the health needs and not necessarily the specific underlying causes for those needs, the smokers are still picking up extra cost. "

TO:TO TMK wrote on Jun 9, 2006 10:18 AM:

" Your loss,if you refrain from seeing your family for such a selfish reason. You'll regret it someday! "

To tmk wrote on Jun 9, 2006 10:01 AM:

" Sit next to me in a resturant and ask me if you can smoke. Answer would be no. I don't believe you ask. Smoking is the most disgusting vile habit that there is. I work in a clean air facility and let me tell you, you can tell when a smoker is getting close. You can smell them long before you see them. If you don't believe me quit smoking for a week(if you can)and smell your house, your car, your clothes. My sister and my mom both smoke and I cannot go visit them because it makes me sick to smell like that. Where does the smell come from? Second hand smoke. If it smells that bad imagine what your lungs smell and look like when you puff and pollute my air with at next cig. dave "

HI TMK AND ALL OTHERS wrote on Jun 9, 2006 9:50 AM:

" Go to the other blog page,"Time's have changed,re; smoking" and read "Name Calling 8:24 A.M. and Smoker 8:50 A.M.". Maybe,just maybe,these people's views will help you all! "

Johnny A. wrote on Jun 9, 2006 9:00 AM:

" To Patriot: An employer can chose to make employees who use tobacco pay higher contributions to their portion of the health insurance premiums, but the premiums that the employer pays to the insurance company are the same for each plan (single, family). The insurance company calculates an employer's premiums based on the health of the employees. Therefore, the smokers, who have expensive smoking-related illnesses, drive up the premiums for us all! This is a solid fact! "

TMK wrote on Jun 9, 2006 8:09 AM:

" TO "what the heck: Not all smokers, which I am one of, are outraged. Why do non-smokers “seem” to stereotype us and put us all into the same group? I go out of my way to try to keep smoke away from others, I clean up my extinguished butts if no ashtray is available and I always ask others that I am sitting next to (in a restaurant that allows smoking) if they mind if I light up. I’ve never had anyone say that they mind. If I do light one up I hold the cigarette so the smoke doesn't go into their faces - I look pretty funny with my hand resting on my head between puffs. I also wave smoke away from others whether they are smokers or not. So please people, do not stereotype us or lump us into one horrible group. Thank you. "

Patriot wrote on Jun 8, 2006 8:03 PM:

" The health insurance offered where I work makes tobacco users (not just smokers) pay higher premiums than those who do not. That is a solid fact. I know too, because I used to smoke years ago. This practice is far from unique. "

Employee View wrote on Jun 8, 2006 6:24 PM:

" What a contradiction for a medical professional to enter a patients room and teach smoking cessation and lung/cardiac health while reeking like smoke. Not to mention the fact that it is dangerous to our patients that we took oaths and pledges to protect when we come into a room with smoke on our clothes whether it be from second hand or ourselves smoking to care for a patient with reactive airway diseases/asthma/COPD/ ect. "

Hey criminal wrote on Jun 8, 2006 6:13 PM:

" Did Johnny A. make that clear enough for you or do you need to travel the world to find your fellow "mopes"? "

chuck barris wrote on Jun 8, 2006 6:10 PM:

" Isnt the point of a bar a place to consume drinks? When did smokers make it a place to smoke first and then maybe drink? Bar owners are fighting with the wrong vice. People pay them for their liquor but smokers bring in their own cigs that they dont see any money off of. I drink, but if they are telling me they dont want my money, so be it. Do you want some old haggard nursing one drink for 3 hours while he smokes two packs, or do you want non-smokers that would stay longer at a smokfree bar and buy rounds of drinks all night? Interesting question,huh? "

To:cough, cough wrote on Jun 8, 2006 6:01 PM:

" I applaud you sir or madam. You have seen the light. "

COUGH COUGH wrote on Jun 8, 2006 3:49 PM:

" Let them smoke! let them smoke one right after another. Then listen to them cough and choke and sound like they have a lung full of junk, the cancer causing junk. Soon they will eliminate theirselve, unfortunately take a few good souls with them. I smoked for 32 years. For 32 years I never believed I was the one who stunk up the place. People come in to a "clean air" facility, and stink up the place with their hair and clothing absorbed with the smell. I apologize to all those who I exposed to the rotten smell and cancer causing 2nd hand smoke. Boy am I glad I hit the smart button. If you want to quit get a smoking patch and put it over your lips, it works. "

Johnny A. wrote on Jun 8, 2006 3:43 PM:

" As someone who works in health insurance, I refute the statement that smokers pay higher insurance premiums. Unless you have an individual health insurance policy, you pay the same amount as all the rest of your fellow employees on the same group plan (or Medicare plan). However, the employees who incur high-dollar medical expenses for smoking-related illnesses ARE responsible for raising every else's premium. Even if smokers did pay higher premiums, it wouldn't come close to paying for their increased medical costs. Just quit -- you'll be glad you did! "

RD wrote on Jun 8, 2006 2:34 PM:

" I'm not sure why smokers who wish to smoke up at a bar or restaurant can't set their drink down and do it on the sidewalk or on a patio where employees don't go. I live in California, and it's a simple system that allows both smokers to smoke and non-smokers to enjoy a drink or a meal in an environment that doesn't stink. Why can't Wisconsin do the same? I see smokers in the midwest huddling in the freezing cold to light up all the time. "

Patriot to criminal wrote on Jun 8, 2006 1:38 PM:

" The point about smokers paying higher premiums (and also ultimately accumulating less in claims), was to rebut other comments. Those comments stated that smokers violate the rights of others by forcing them to subsidise health insurance costs for the smokers. Though you evidentally have some issues, I'll remind you that nowhere was it said the higher premiums were improper. Also, if you would pay more attention and tone down your volcanic eruptions a bit, you would have realized that I am not even a smoker. If anyone looks like a "mope" around here (whatever that is), well, you might want to check a mirror. Also, if I were a sheep, I wouldn't bother to espuse an apparently minority view. With a handle like "criminal" I wonder what your occupation is. "

what the heck is this world coming to? wrote on Jun 8, 2006 1:23 PM:

" Seriously, I think its funny how all the smokers seem outraged. Yes, you have rights, but we do to, if we don't want to breathe in smoke, we shouldn't have to. No one is FORCING you to put the cigarette in your mouth and smoke it, so you're addicted... well no one forced you to start but yourself, so its your own fault and you now have the burden to quit or deal with it. Have some self control and stop being so angry because we don't want to breathe your crap. To all those smokers calling non smokers WHINERS well I'm sure you have all whined about something or other in your life.. traffic? construction? Something. We have a lot more to worry about in this world besides this and everyone should just love each other instead of being so cold. "

TMK wrote on Jun 8, 2006 1:07 PM:

" I really can't understand why people have to "name bash" others. It reminds me of children when they're mad at each other. As already said - we are adults - so lets act like one. I've said my piece on how to compromise. Smoking will not go away - too much money for the State and Federal Governments. So - instead of name bashing, let's come up with a solution that will appease most as you cannot please everyone. "

criminal wrote on Jun 8, 2006 12:34 PM:

" First...... no one. NO ONE. is MAKING you buy THAT insurance policy. If you get "stuck" paying more than you think you should, you are free to buy elsewhere. But then you won't do that, because that would take what, moments of painstaking research and a little bravery to stand up to the paycheck highjackers who rob you of cash every month. And to whoever thought I had lost my mind...... um...... no, I not only have one, but I USE IT, which is why i have a job I love and travel the world doing it instead of plodding along the sheep superhighway with mopes like you. "

To: Out of Hand wrote on Jun 8, 2006 12:30 PM:

" I agree with you completely. It seems the non smokers are looking for Utopia. They would probably finally be happy when everyone looks, thinks, dresses, and acts the same. Kinda like the Stepford Wives. Everyone adult has the right to make their own decisions. Smoking is not a crime!! Does anyone remember a short, fat, bald communist who pounded his shoe on the desk and yelled "we will overtake you from within"? Well -- it's happening. "

WOW wrote on Jun 8, 2006 8:41 AM:

" As a smoker, I can understand both sides of the issue. I smoke more under stress and would probably be upset if I was at the hospital visiting a loved one, needed a break, wanted a smoke and there was nowhere to go. But I can also see the point of when I too walk into the clinic/hospital and you are having to walk through a cloud of smoke. I feel strongly that if people need or want to smoke, it should be done away from the doorways or high traffic areas so non-smokers don't have to be bothered by our nasty habits. The name calling back and forth, where is that getting any of you. I know it is a sore issue, but it is just making the smokers look worse in my opinion. Keep the demeaning comments to yourselves, it serves no purpose, we are all adults here! "

Poor smokers wrote on Jun 8, 2006 8:15 AM:

" Ah you poor smelly smokers can't smoke on hospital grounds any more how sad. Smoking should be illegal at least this is a step in the right direction. "

Patriot on insurance wrote on Jun 7, 2006 10:57 PM:

" For one, smokers pay a higher premium than non smokers, so you aren't paying for them. Number two, now get this, over the life of an average smoker to that of an average non smoker, the non smoker costs the insurer MORE due to a longer life. Don't believe? Go dig up the stats. Doesn't get much press because it takes away one of the shiniest phony arguments abolishonists have. "

To: Hurt by smoking -from Dr D wrote on Jun 7, 2006 10:37 PM:

" Most smokers dont care of your story. I myself do and am sorry it had to go that way. But in the end, smokers will say it wasnt secondhand smoke, why did he go to those places, and something else about their rights. Stories like yours are exactly the point non-smokers are trying to bring forth. But diehard (how fitting) smokers will never accept the truth in order to justify their addiction "

Ridiculous wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:52 PM:

" I'm not a smoker, but I think this step is a little extreme for those who do. I also work at Gundersen and walk by the "designated smoking area" every day for work and never once has the smoke bothered me. It's not like the smokers all huddle into a group and blow one giant puff of smoke together. Everyone's spread out...the smoke diminishes quickly and shouldn't bother anyone. The area is also far enough from the building where the smoke doesn't enter our ventilation system. Quite an unnecessary step if you ask me. "

Patriot to Slavery wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:43 PM:

" Better bone up on reading comprehension skills a bit. Clearly a distinction of degree was made. The point was that a majority shouldn't ever be allowed to take away the freedoms of the minority just because they might get away with it. "

Hurt by Smoking wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:46 PM:

" What many of you fail to realize is the choices you make effect others. My father recently passed away due to lung cancer from second-hand smoke. He spent time in bars/restaurants where people smoked, and it ultimately cost him his life. If there were choices for him to go to establishments that were non-smoking, he would've went to them--but he also had friends who smoked around him. Before any of you say how it is your right to smoke and poison yourself, just remember that my children have to grow up without their grandfather (who was only 58), because YOUR smoking hurts others, not just you. I also have a friend who smoked around her infant son, and he now has asthma due to his exposure. Why is it okay for this to happen? You have the right to kill/hurt yourself, not anyone else. "

To: To Mr insurance man wrote on Jun 7, 2006 6:46 PM:

" Why must he be a politician? Because of commen sense? If you came to get insurance with aids, would this be a risk? yes. If you came to get insurance after being addicted to crack for your life, would this be a risk? Yes. If you come to get insurance as a smoker, this is a risk, an accelerated risk. You are doing something that slowly kills your cells and organs. I eat healthy, exercise, and dont smoke cancer sticks so why should I pay higher insurance to cover smokers policys? I shouldnt so shove it.. "

Oingo wrote on Jun 7, 2006 6:35 PM:

" You know my favorite smoker arguement? Actually there are so many lame ones but I like " Cars and trucks and chimneys will kill you anyway, so what difference does smoking make?" Pure genious with that arguement. Oh, almost forgot.....whine whine whine whine "

TO:TO BLAH BLAH BLAH wrote on Jun 7, 2006 5:09 PM:

" From my "FRESH AIR POLLUTED MIND".HISSSSSSSSSSS!!!! God forbid,the only thing that we/I breathe,that's going to kill us is cig.smoke. Wake up and smell that "FRESH "UNPOLLUTED"AIR"your dreaming about! "

AHH:TO SLAVERY.... wrote on Jun 7, 2006 5:06 PM:

" ...another "FRESH AIR POLLUTED MIND". "

BROKEN RECORD wrote on Jun 7, 2006 5:04 PM:

" How many times do you have to be told?ALL AIR POLLUTION IS BAD AND NO MATTER WHAT YOU ELIMATE, IT'S NEVER GOING TO GO AWAY!!!! BRAIN DEAD!!!! IT'S JUST A MATTER OF "CERTAIN PEOPLE" TRYING TO GAIN CONTROL!How many times do you have to be told? ALL AIR POLLUTION IS BAD AND NO MATTER WHAT YOU ELIMINATE, IT'S NEVER GOING TO GO AWAY!!!! BRAIN DEAD!!!IT"S JUST A MATTER OF "CERTAIN PEOPLE" TRYING TO BE IN CONTROL!How many times do you have to be told... "

OUT OF HAND wrote on Jun 7, 2006 4:52 PM:

" Things are just getting out of hand in this town and country. People come here because of it being "The Land Of The Free"? If everyone would just stop thinking that only their opinions were the ones that mattered and sat down and tried to come to some level of agreement,this would be a much better place to live. There is NO REASON why,we can't ALL be HAPPY! This I'M RIGHT YOUR WRONG ATTITUDE,IS WHAT HAS MESSED UP THIS WHOLE COUNTRY! You might as well bring back,slavery,Hitler tactics,etc.because,that exactly where this is all heading.Non-smokers can't be all that pure,nor not have some bad habit that at some time some place is not going to effect someone,gross someone out or kill someone.They are just too obnoxiously hard headed to admit that they could be wrong/do wrong. "

To: Bunch of smokin' babies wrote on Jun 7, 2006 4:24 PM:

" Obviously you are quite ignorant! Do you have any friends or acquaintances who smoke? Do you talk to them like you are talking on this forum? You are not only stereotyping smokers but also people/families who are on welfare who truly need the aid! Think what you want, but please have respect for people. "

SLAVERY!?!?!?! wrote on Jun 7, 2006 4:04 PM:

" How clueless and insenstive. Are you pals of the person suggesting HITLER will come back from the grave because they can't smoke? My god. Get a grip. Smoke away - AWAY FROM THE REST OF US! "

to: blah blah blah wrote on Jun 7, 2006 4:03 PM:

" Wow. Nice attitude. Now were is that venom coming from? "

quick bickering... wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:55 PM:

" The only rights here are those of the property owners to do what they want on their property. If this is the choice of these property owners, so be it. "

TO:FORMER PATIENT wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:48 PM:

" BLAH!BLAH!BLAH! The smell of antiseptic is enough to make most sick. I just came in from outside and all I could smell is exhaust! Boy,that was healthy! "

Patriot wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:44 PM:

" The issue isn't about if smoking is good for your health or not. The issue is government stepping on people's freedoms. It is wrong to deny people the freedom to smoke just because the majority doesn't approve and smokers are a minority. Obviously not even close to the same degree but, similar in principle, is the idea that people once had that slavery was ok just because the majority (non slaves) approved. And not that my point doesn't stand on it's own merit, but if it matters to anyone I am a FORMER smoker some number of years now. "

Another non-smoker wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:43 PM:

" I am estatic about this decision. I can't wait until the majority of businesses have the same policy. "

To: Former Patient wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:31 PM:

" I'm with you. Being cared for by a medical professional who has just had a cigarette isn't much fun. To smell like that and then care for sick people is, in my opinion, unprofessional. Same with visitors--being visited by someone who has just smoked can make a sick person feel even more sick. I don't think smokers understand how bad they really do smell. "

I enjoy all of you... wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:30 PM:

" Those of you arguing that “it’s my body, I should decide what happens to it” I hope you consider that this fall when election time comes around. You all (smokers and non-smokers) feel entitled to protect yourself and treat your body the way you want to and you don’t want others to take your ‘rights’ away. Make sure you don’t allow the ‘rights’ to be taken away from the same sex couples that just want to have some happiness in their lives. They aren’t affecting your body in a negative way. I hope you aren’t too hypocritical and fight for your ‘right’ to smoke or have smoke free air but then let happy, loving people not be allowed to see their partners in the hospital, etc. "

Smoker's daughter wrote on Jun 7, 2006 3:14 PM:

" I tried for several years to get my father to quit smoking. His argument was always that it was his right and his choice to smoke, and everyone has to die from something. Now he is unable to speak in complete sentences or enjoy a meal without stopping to catch his breath. He no longer spends time with friends or takes vacations because he uses oxygen and is uncomfortable going out of the house with it. It is God's will when we leave but personally I would like to have as much influence on how as possible. "

Former Patient wrote on Jun 7, 2006 2:59 PM:

" To the nurse that doesn't smoke whie working - bless you. I was in the ICU at GL for months- and for most of time I couldn't speak. But I could smell the wreaking smoke on a couple of my nurses. Look at it from that standpoint... I was sick enough to be in the ICU, and had nurses moving me around, changing dressings, cleaning me up. It's not a hands-off approach. A few people couldn't be inconvenienced go to without smoking while at work? It was nasty been hugged by visitors who were coming in from a smoke. When some complain they need a stress-break by smoking, think about the stress on critically ill people who have to put up with that. Getting into a vehicle through the smoke cloud when you're ill is revolting. "

TO:TMK AND CAN"T WE HAVE BOTH wrote on Jun 7, 2006 2:47 PM:

" WOW!Finally someone who can read and understand fair! It's because of non-smokers and their rightous attitudes,that a happy medium cannot be met.You can darn well bet,if the tables were turned,and everything was to go to smoking,they be just as upset,and angry,as are we now! You just can't reason with a non-smoker,plain and simple. "

Sick & Tired wrote on Jun 7, 2006 2:26 PM:

" I have been at the back entrance of GL on many occassions -- yes to have a cigarette. If they are going to take this area away from the smokers, then I think they should also make their mini buses, cars, cabs, etc. turn off their engines instead of letting them run while they are inside. Let me tell you, the carbon monoxide fumes from these vehicles gets pretty bad. Let's get real -- there is more than 1 entrance to both GL and FS. Keep one area in the back for the smokers. Non smokers use the designated entry ways. Just a thought -- how many people have smoked for years without getting cancer? Gee -- do you think it may be hereditary??? "

TMK wrote on Jun 7, 2006 2:02 PM:

" As to “going across the street”, what about people who walk through that area? If I’m visiting someone in the hospital all I need to do is go to the sidewalk, which is city owned, by the road. You may still have to walk through my cloud of smoke. The hospitals should create an area out of the main thoroughfare for smokers to go thereby making it less likely for a non-smoker to walk through the clouds of smoke. Also, if they are going to fine smokers, or whatever they are planning on doing, it should be for littering. Too many times I see young and old toss their butts on the ground rather than use the available ashtray or, if no ashtray is available, they don’t stomp them out and pick them up to dispose of later. "

TMK wrote on Jun 7, 2006 2:02 PM:

" To Bunch of smokin’ babies: You are stereotyping cigarette smokers. It seems here that you have something against people on “welfare” rather than smokers. FYI: Welfare rules were changed many years ago. “Welfare” in its original sense it not available any more. Read up about it before you bash the poor. "

Can't we have both! wrote on Jun 7, 2006 1:25 PM:

" Isn't there a way that both smokers and non smokers could be happy. I'm all for not smoking inside resturants, bars exct. but it's a bit radical not to be able to smoke outside. If there was a place smokers could go not near enteranes or the general public entering an establishment, couldn't we find some middle ground. "

I GUESS>>> wrote on Jun 7, 2006 1:15 PM:

" ...Once a non-smoking moron,always a non-smoking moron. "

TO:CLEAN AIR wrote on Jun 7, 2006 1:08 PM:

" No matter how hard you try,you'll NEVER make the air clean.By eliminating one SMALL portion,is not going to make any differance.Everyday,there are new ones created.This is what makes SENSE,deal with it! "

TO:TO HEY wrote on Jun 7, 2006 1:02 PM:

" That is not our/nor your co-workers problem.It sounds like your insurance company is at fault,as neither you nor your co-workers wrote the policy guidelines. Maybe you should be "bit$^ing"at them and not holding it against your co's. "

fyi wrote on Jun 7, 2006 12:41 PM:

" alotttttttt of you sound like radical moronssssssssssss grow up live and let live. "

To Mr. Insurance man wrote on Jun 7, 2006 12:19 PM:

" I think that's discrimination to make smokers pay more. You must be a politician also because making smokers pay more is a "political" way to go after the cigarette makers. Put that one in your pipe! "

Clean Air wrote on Jun 7, 2006 11:59 AM:

" So those of us who want to breathe in a bit cleaner air shouldn't be able to do so at all because of the other toxins? Just because we can't get rid of all toxins we shouldn't try to get rid of any? What sense does that make? And again to Terrified: If someone uses coffee, soda, fingernail biting, or xanax...none of those will cause someone else to have health problems. So they aren't comparable. "

to:TO:HEY CRIMINAL RESPONSE wrote on Jun 7, 2006 11:56 AM:

" Sorry, at my company, we all pay the same for health insurance. So thanks to the 75% of those who smoke, I'm stuck paying higher premiums even though I don't smoke. "

enough wrote on Jun 7, 2006 11:45 AM:

" I don't understand why everyone keeps going on and on w/ this. It's done, it will be happening. You are talking about having a designated area for smokers to go, it's across the street. If you need a cigarette that bad, I think you are able to walk across the street. I am a smoker and work at the clinic, I chose not to smoke at work because I respect my patients, I don't want them walking into a cloud of smoke or smelling my smokey clothes/breath. I think this is a great step for the hospitals. I can't believe how proud you smokers are of yourselves, I'm ashamed of my bad habit and wish I could quit! Hopefully it'll help me and other employees to quit and eventually lead to lower healthcare costs! "

TO:RUTHIE AND ALL wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:49 AM:

" I guess it's o.k./better to stand "OUTSIDE" the hospital,restaurant,bar,school etc. and breathe the toxins,which are ALOT worse,even though you non-smokers will never admit this,from the cars,buses,trucks,factories etc.??? You will never be able to breathe so-called clean air,there is no such thing,not even in your closed up house.God forbid we should enforce pollution control/emissions laws. Yes,we need cars,buses,factories etc.,so why not rally to change/enforce laws for those BIGGER polluters? "

TO:HMM wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:34 AM:

" And which ammendment says,the business owner has no rights,and non-smokers who don't pay their (business owners)bills have the right to dictate how they are run???? "

Ruthie wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:29 AM:

" I don't understand the rabid posts about having noone tell you how to run your business. The article isn't about telling you how to run your business, it is about Gunderson and Franciscan Skemp deciding this for themselves! And a great decision it is. And by the way, a friend who smoked many years ago said he had no idea how nasty and obnoxious his smoke had been to other people, until he quit. I hope some day many of you smokers will kick the habit too -- for your own health, and then also you may come to realize why non-smokers object so strenuously to having to breathe other people's poison. "

??? wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:21 AM:

" If the Hospitals want to go non-smoking,why are they waiting so long??? 6 months plus,to enforce this? "

TO:HEY CRIMINAL RESPONSE wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:17 AM:

" From:an insurance agent; YOU PAY LESS IF YOU DON'T SMOKE,so "BLOW THAT THEORY OUT YOUR "BUTT" " SMOKERS,DO PAY HIGHER PREMIUMS.And speaking of MINDLESS,where did you lose yours??? "

Thoughtful wrote on Jun 7, 2006 9:03 AM:

" It seems to me that by not providing some sort of a designated smoking area, you are penalizing persons who do smoke. A valid point is made "air is free". If the smoking area is far enough away from traffic areas, from doorways, from regular walkways, etc, then what is the problem? Many people are at the hospital during very stressful times.. the serious illness of family member or loved one, a life or death surgery, etc. From one who knows...the waiting can be VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY stress filled. No, smoking is not a good habit, but somewhere there needs to be a line drawn about who controls a person's personal decisions. I believe that there should be a smoking area for hospital patrons, visitors and staff alike. This is my $.02 worth. "

TO:DR.D. wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:47 AM:

" Why don't you just go play some golf?At least that way,you would'nt be on here,spouting off!You can take your "frustraions"out on the balls and clubs.Maybe,they should ban golf.That is one sport that makes (assuming you are)men fly into instant rages,and your throwing of clubs and balls are a hazard to others lives. "

Clean Air wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:45 AM:

" If people stop smoking out side is there going to be clean air? Is smoking and second hand smoke the only cause of lung cancer? Is smoking the only thing that is bad for a persons health? Is the tabbaco company the only company that markets a product that is unhealthy. Do we still live in a free country. "

TO:DR.D. wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:29 AM:

" Why,is it you assume,the person is female??? Assuming,like you do, you MUST be a "MALE SHOVINIST PIG",on top of everything else you have been called.You go right ahead and spray your RAID. You'd be in jail so fast,you would'nt know what hit you. Spraying raid maybe legal,but,its HOW it's used that is illegal. "

Terrified wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:18 AM:

" I smoke. I don't litter and if there is no place to put the waste (butts) I pocket them. I believe that there should be an area set aside for those who do smoke. Try having your non-verbal child's back opened from neck to tailbone and go without coffee, soda, fingernail biting, or xanax - all things that I do go without (ok, I like my soda) - those too are all disgusting habits that I can't see anyone banning in the near future even though caffeine IS similar to nicotine in it's addictive nature. Out of the way so nobody HAS to go through it but don't do this to people who are already terrified enough. "

TO:BUNCH OF SMOKING BABIES wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:15 AM:

" Yes they are!They are taking away the business owners right to run their business,so,AGAIN,if you/anyone else feels the need to DICTATE how they are run,then start paying the bills,taxes,employess etc. "

TO:PATRIOT wrote on Jun 7, 2006 8:10 AM:

" We have our own business,and the point we ARE TRYING TO MAKE IS ;LET US RUN IT OUR WAY! HOW MANY TIMES DOES THIS HAVE TO BE SAID ON HERE???? IF IT GOES UNDER,IT"S NO-ONES PROBLEM BUT OURS!!!!GEEZ! "

Umm wrote on Jun 7, 2006 7:23 AM:

" Right to smoke?! Which ammendment to the consitution was that, again? LOL "

reality check!! wrote on Jun 7, 2006 5:04 AM:

" we've all been to this fire before, and with a 1/2 hour lunch, one can take a walk off the grounds of the hospital and have a cig..the smoker is happy, the non-smoker is happy, everyone needs to settle down, pretty soon with all this rhetoric, the ACLU will be pounding at the doors, and to DR.D..I am sensing your a resident , with your childlike responses, I hope you treat your patients with more empathy and compassion then you have shown here, better yet...I hope your a VET! "

criminal part 2 the sequel wrote on Jun 7, 2006 2:23 AM:

" did I say that I'm a smoker? you assume more than you know. also, 'starting at the local level' with smokers is pretty weak. we should start with state legislators and work our way up and see that they're not taking money from select industries looking for favorable treatment and then fail to re-elect them by exposing it. THAT will never happen, hoever, because the majority are narrow minded morons like yourself who refuse to engage in battles that actually matter. "

Kilgore -alive and well in camp B.K. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 11:20 PM:

" "You smell that? Do you smell that? Nicotine, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that. I love the smell of nicotine in the morning. "

ELECT LIBS! wrote on Jun 6, 2006 11:07 PM:

" I suffer from Intermediate Explosive Disorder & I need a smoke/fix. But it's not my fault; society did this to me. Stop the Madness! Elect Butch K. and smoke anything you want to! Heres token to you! Summer Love! The CEO Cheese and FFF co-founder. Smoking is the lefts right! Peace, bellbottoms and hashpipes! "

Re: why does it take so long to post... wrote on Jun 6, 2006 10:14 PM:

" You know, I've been wondering about that. Maybe the Trib posts them in groups when they get time. It's unfortunate that people couldn't be trusted to make comments that didn't require approval in the first place, but there are always those bad apples ruining it for those who play fair. I wonder how many comments they get that they absolutely won't post compared to the ones they do post. "

Hey criminal response wrote on Jun 6, 2006 9:44 PM:

" Yes property taxes might go up, maybe not. But if smoking was banned, my insurance would not be outrageously priced to make sure you cancer bags and emphezima hackers can live another year in order to by cigs. As far as the tobacco companies go, I would love nothing more than to see them thrown in jail. Wont happen though, thats like taking on the government, so we start at the local level with the mindless,weak smokers. "

Dr D wrote on Jun 6, 2006 9:37 PM:

" lol, I see a dreg has come to cry. Yes little missy I am a pig headed jerk when Im being poisoned. Tell me where you hang out and I'll see how you like a can of Raid in your face. After all, its legal and its my right to spray it where I want. Right? "

The FFF wrote on Jun 6, 2006 8:54 PM:

" Next it will be a felony to smoke. It's already illegal to toke a little dope. Stop the madness! Vote liberal! Elect B.K.! "

Bad business sense wrote on Jun 6, 2006 8:34 PM:

" I'm suprised that the hospitals would want to ban smoking. I would think they would encourage it, to ensure plenty of future cancer patients and all of the revenue they would bring. "

WHY??? wrote on Jun 6, 2006 8:25 PM:

" Why does it take the Tribune so freakin long to post comments??? The issue at hand could be over and done with, before,everyone can say their peace. "

Bob B. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 7:28 PM:

" Bars and casinos next! "

criminal response to criminal wrote on Jun 6, 2006 7:04 PM:

" Oh wait......... my bad........ the government makes millions in "sin" tax on cigarette sales. If less people smoked then property taxes would go up. HA.. bet that got a few pacemakers clicking in high gear. "

criminal wrote on Jun 6, 2006 7:03 PM:

" sixty nine comments and nobody is talking about the tobacco companies that make billions of dollars in back room deals with pharmacutical companies, med tech companies, other "investments" usually without regulation and boiled down to fourth party transactions. Nobody is talking about boycotting retailers who sell cigarettes.....that would be unconstitutional! Consider a Kwik Trip that didn't sell smokes or tobacco of any kind? When it's pot, crack or meth, people are all in favor of killing the dealers and nuking the Cali Cartel. More people die from smoke than dope. Think about that the next time you decide someone else's rights or lack of rights. "

Again wrote on Jun 6, 2006 6:59 PM:

" Lets ban reality shows, they pollute my head "

Bunch of smokin' babies wrote on Jun 6, 2006 6:04 PM:

" Let me know say, no one is taking away your right to smoke by making their businesses smoke free. There is a place all you babies could go. Its called YOUR HOUSE!! So just go take your welfare money and buy some cigarettes. Dont bother buying food or things that you/your family needs, buy up them cigarettes! God knows you all probably deserve it. "

Patriot (to All About Rights) wrote on Jun 6, 2006 5:54 PM:

" There is no "right" to clean air per se in general, though there are community standards. But anyway, let's just say for the sake of argument that you have such a "right." Your "right" shouldn't extend or have force on the private property that belongs to others. The owner of the property has the right to allow or not allow smoking as s/he sees fit. Don't like it? Stay home or open your own place and run it the way you want and cater to the clientel you want. "

TO:DR.D....... wrote on Jun 6, 2006 5:45 PM:

" ......NOR DO I GIVE A DAMN ABOUT YOU, NOR YOUR RIGHTS.YOUR JUST A PIG HEADED JERK! "

Take the bus wrote on Jun 6, 2006 5:23 PM:

" Maybe health care workers could also live in a specific commune and be bussed...wait a minute, I hate that exhaust smell (outlaw them)or perhaps a horse drawn carriage ... wait those smelly horse apples (gotta stay away), OK lets get some super Trekkies to just beam people to their jobs...ahhh thats it, no pollution, no whining. Fuel pollutes much more than cigarette smoke, how about adding that to the CAN'T DO list? Ladies and Gentlemen, you will have to refrain from perfumes and colognes as it invades MY air space! How far do we go with this crap? "

While we're at it... wrote on Jun 6, 2006 5:19 PM:

" Since the smokers are now suggesting we ban nearly everything, let's add one more. Let's ban procreation. When people create and give birth a child, the child receives an automatic death sentence. There. Everyone happy? "

TO:J.R. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 5:06 PM:

" Then so should exhaust from cars,buses,semi's,dump trucks,factory's etc. This crap is a lot worse to breathe,and you have no choice but to do so.Don't tell me it's because of necessity,either. Why don't you go out and campaign to have the emission standards raised? Because ,it's easier to pick on smokers???!!! "

Doctor D. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:53 PM:

" Ahhh, the tide is turning finally. When we last had the public forum about smoking in bars and public places, I and a couple others were against smoking. We had to listen as clouded, smoke stinking voices poured and coughed out their war cry for us to give them their rights back. Now 90% of these letters are about how sick people are getting with smokers addictions. I dont give a damn about your rights smokers. Keep your smoke in your black tar lungs..... "

All about rights wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:50 PM:

" Ponder this....you have the right to do whatever you want in this country as long as it doesn't interfere with someone elses rights. (right to clean air) "

TO:J.R. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:32 PM:

" Mac and cheese,CAN raise your cholestrol,clog your arteries,and make you fat. Where have you been??? All fast food places should then be banned,also.They serve heart attacks on a bun,all alcohol,should be banned,because it kills your liver,so on and so on.Your just not going to give up until you get "YOUR" way,are you??? I hope you enjoy driving behind a bus,car,truck etc.because you obviously,think that is good for you. Think,I'll quit smoking and go breathe some of that so called fresh air thats supposed to be so much better for me! "

TO:J.R. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:25 PM:

" Then so should exhaust from cars,buses,semi's,dump trucks,factory's etc. This crap is a lot worse to breathe,and you have no choice but to do so.Don't tell me it's because of necessity,either. Why don't you go out and campaign to have the emission standards raised? Because ,it's easier to pick on smokers??? "

TMK wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:11 PM:

" Part II: As to sitting in our car, like the one said, with our window rolled down the smoke still gets out, also if the car is running people are inhaling the exhaust from it, which has its own cancer-causing emissions. I know someone will write something about us rolling down our windows. We don’t like the car filling with blue smoke just as non-smokers don’t like it. When we are in our homes, which are much larger than a car, it never turns blue with smoke. Therefore, there’s no reason to go there. It’s a worthless part of this forum. In addendum, smoking will never be fully banned - take a look at history and prohibition. That didn't work and neither will banning smoking altogether. "

TMK wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:10 PM:

" Part I: I have no problem with not smoking inside buildings such as restaurants, laundromats, etc., BUT when I am now being told I cannot even smoke outside I am starting to get a bit irate. NO ONE owns the air outside. The air constantly moves, so there is no way someone could. We do have a "right" to smoke just as others have a "right" not to. I can understand not being allowed by the doors of businesses as the smoke can then get in, but give us a place nearby that alerts the non-smokers that smoking is allowed there. They can then choose to walk through the area or around it. If we have to walk farther away to smoke, they can walk farther to avoid the smoke. "

Thorn wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:02 PM:

" Now let's get the hospital employees to sign agreements that they will not smoke (period), drink, drive over the speed limit, swear, submit to obesity testing on a regular basis, wear "appropariate clothing, no gossip, will not frequent bars, etc... I mean they are health "professionals" right? GIVE ME A BREAK!!! "

TO: DON AND SUE wrote on Jun 6, 2006 3:48 PM:

" Before you start to berate me for my spelling,you'd better check your own! According to your post on 6-5 at 7:34 A.M.,you seem to think,door is spelled "DOOOR",whether is spelled "WETHER" and degrees is spelled "DEGRESS". And who's calling the smokers stupid??? "

it's a good thing wrote on Jun 6, 2006 3:32 PM:

" To smoke to not to smoke? If you can't - you won't, at least until you get in your car or at home. As a former smoker, I think some of the smoker's are acting out their "nic fits" int their comments. The thought of being denied their cigarettes is just freaking them out. Should a "habit" be that important anyway? Smoking less will do you all good - you just don't know it yet. Shouldn't you all be more worried about the government listening in on your phone calls? "

Question? wrote on Jun 6, 2006 3:13 PM:

" I do agree that the cloud of smoke one has to walk through is obnoxious when entering or exiting an institution. Have you ever looked closely at who is smoking at the entrances and exits? It is not employees, it is the general public, visitors and patients. Next time you enter one of the health facilities, really take a look at who is smoking at the entrances and exits before you attack the employees. The institutions have encouraged this practice through the willingness to watch this take place, instead of enforcing the smoking policy they wrote up. You may want to question why people are smoking where they shouldn't, instead of pointing fingers and insulting each other. Ask the people who are in charge of enforcing the non-smoking why they are not doing their jobs. "

J.R. wrote on Jun 6, 2006 3:08 PM:

" Smoking should be banned in the United States period. It would not be an issue of the government telling its citizens what they can and can't do, but rather not allowing corporations to market deadly products. Imagine if Kraft wanted to sell macaroni and cheese that drastically increased your risk of cancer, heart disease, or stroke. Would they be allowed to? The FDA pulls medications off the shelves when it is determined that there is a significant health risk. If it is determined that the tires on your car are dangerous there is a mandatory recall, and that product is no longer available to the public. Why are tobacco products any different? "

TO:DON AND SUE wrote on Jun 6, 2006 1:54 PM:

" Who died and made you God??? Where do you get off saying smokers have no rights,"PLAIN AND SIMPLE"? I sure would hate to be as ignorant, closed minded and overbearing as you are. No wonder society sucks.It's because of people like you. "

Lets Bring Him Back wrote on Jun 6, 2006 1:48 PM:

" Who? Hitler. This whole town and country is turning into such a communist society. Everybody,has rights,be it that we all agree/disagree with them ,is one of the rights/freedoms we have. It seems lately, everyone is just looking for an excuse to OVER state these rights. There are some people,who think that only THEIR opinion(you know who you are,it starts with the word NON-)is the one that counts or eveyone should agree with.Wrong! As atated by someone before,let people decide for themselves if they want their businees smoke free,alchohol free,fat free etc. Unless those of you who disagree,want to pay the bills,employees,taxes etc., you/ nor the government should have any right to dictate how they are run. There would be enough non-smoking/smoking places for eveyone to go to and all this arguing could be put to rest. "

Pearl wrote on Jun 6, 2006 12:48 PM:

" I think it is time La Crosse County goes totally smokefree in all the workplaces. Lets take the lead on this in our state. Our health care institutions have done so now lets all follow. It makes good sense and I support it 100% "

Way to go Jenny (6-5-06 letter) wrote on Jun 6, 2006 12:37 PM:

" What a healthy and positive response. You say you are looking at this change as a step to becoming a non smoker. You can do it. Way to think positive! "

Patriot wrote on Jun 6, 2006 12:22 PM:

" Jason has the concept. If businesses wish to adopt a non smoking posture, then I fully support it. If they wish to ALLOW it, I fully support that too. Some folks these days think they have "rights" that, they in fact, do not have. "

Patriot to Don and Sue wrote on Jun 6, 2006 12:07 PM:

" The back door that you spoke of is not smokey. The smoking area, though near by, is far enough away. By your other comments it is clear that you just do not approve of people smoking and would like to have them conform to your views. You certainly are entitled have your preferences, but do not try to force them upon others. "

...more formerly wrote on Jun 6, 2006 10:47 AM:

" It obviously hits a chord with the smokers if their reaction to being inconvenienced is to lash out at a group of people who society still collectively finds okay to bash without apology. You sound like a spoiled child when you retort with a comment like, "Yeah well, someone else is being bad too!" "

formerly obese wrote on Jun 6, 2006 10:47 AM:

" I am not clear how this conversation turned into a forum for bashing the obese, but there are some pretty obvious differences between smoking and obesity. Must this be pointed out? 1. Everyone must eat to stay alive. Not true for smoking. 2. When ANYONE eats, obese or not, it does not affect the air quality of those around them. The person eating next to you does not gain wait when you eat - or get cancer. 3. Obesity is considered by the CDC to be a disease. The majority of the obese work hard to find solutions to this. If we contend that tobacco addiction is also a disease, wouldn't businesses be doing you a favor by making it a little less convenient (NOT ILLEGAL) to do it on their property? "

No smoking at a hospital... wrote on Jun 6, 2006 9:49 AM:

" Of all places to complain about being non-smoking, a HOSPITAL? Where people go to get better? You smokers need to shut up and accept the fact that we don't want you around when you're enjoying your cigarette like it's the last one you'll ever have. "

It's all about Image wrote on Jun 6, 2006 9:45 AM:

" What is the real issue, is it employee health or the image that is being portrayed by smoking? It doesn't seem right to see a doctor or nurse smoke. This is the reason for a smoke free campus, to boost image and there for profits in the community.Hospitals are a business.Where are the employees going to go for nicotine replacement aids to help them quite smoking,the hospital and who provides the hospitals, the pharmaceutical companies. Every one wins! What a great service the hospitals are doing for their employees, or are they? It is proven that long term smokers who quite gain weight. Next are we going to weigh all employees and give them an ultimatum to loose weight or else. The point is it does come down to rights, if this is allowed what is next! "

ex-smoker wrote on Jun 6, 2006 9:17 AM:

" I am actually in favor of this move mostly because no matter what areas are designated "smoking areas", inevitably you end up walking through clouds of smoke trying to walk through the door. Smokers are notorious for bending the rules. Check out the butts thrown around if you need proof. The problem the hospitals will have is enforcement. No matter what your policy is, smoking is not against the law, so arrests cannot be made. Are they really gonna kick grandma off the property for smoking or forcibly remove a patient hooked up to an IV? I don't think so. "

Compassion wrote on Jun 6, 2006 7:35 AM:

" To the person who thinks I am not compassionate, you couldn't be more wrong. I watched my father-in-law die of lung cancer. It was painful, tragic, and no one should ever go through that. Would it be compassionate to share toxic cigarette smoke with others so that they might endure the same fate? Of course not. Smoking is legal, and I'm sure it's very pleasurable - the minute someone figures out a way to have it only poison the user (like bad food does) I will stand behind ANYONE who wants to smoke like a chimney. If the government didn't profit HEAVILY from the tobacco industry it wouldn't be legal because they wouldn't be able to control it. "

Former Smoker wrote on Jun 6, 2006 7:29 AM:

" This is so much fun to read! I still can't believe how defensive smokers get about thier own bad habit. As one reader put it, you are going to be inconvienced. So what? You still get to have your cake and eat it too! (So to speak.) So why are you still whining? No body is telling you to stop smoking. Just go away from those who don't. Is it that hard? "

Reality Check!!!!!!!!! wrote on Jun 6, 2006 4:30 AM:

" lets put this into perspective.... EAT RIGHT, EXCERISE, DIE ANYWAY!!! "

smoker's mother wrote on Jun 5, 2006 10:36 PM:

" My youngest child smokes and I have noticed some differences between his generation and mine.....his generation understands that if they want to smoke they can not do it in our house - they may have to go outside and they need to take care of their mess - no complaining or whining about rights being taken away etc. It seems my generation grew up thinking that smoking was a right they had and could force the outcome of it (second hand smoke) on anyone they choose. It is all about having good manners - some smokers do and some don't. "

desserts vs smoking wrote on Jun 5, 2006 10:11 PM:

" I agree the removing items with peanuts as an ingredient is a great suggestion. As far as not offering any desserts,, the difference would be the people overeating the desserts are not hurting anyone except themselves. Smokers share their habit with anyone unlucky enough to be walking past them. I haven't seen anyone eating chocolate cake insist others walking by take a bite! "

too self-righteous wrote on Jun 5, 2006 9:43 PM:

" I don't smoke. I do think that smokers do have a right to smoke on grounds if they're in their car, etc. What really bothers me about this is that society (most certainly in La Crosse) is becoming so self-righteous. What will happen if people smoke within the vicinity of the hospital? Will they be arrested? I have no doubt that that would happen. More and more people in our society are being arrested for things that ten years ago were seen as within the normal scope of things. La Crosse is becoming a very punitive society. "

Clean the gene pool wrote on Jun 5, 2006 9:20 PM:

" Smoking cleans the gene pool. I say have at it, smoke'em if you got 'em. The tobacco companies should triple the tar and other "good" stuff to get this process moving along faster. "

different perspective wrote on Jun 5, 2006 9:13 PM:

" Consider the time it takes to smoke a cigarette and the impact on businesses other than health-care concerns. Are non-smoking employees afforded the same amount of time away from their occupations? Is this time documented in some way so employees are unpaid for this time? "

To 'smoker' wrote on Jun 5, 2006 9:08 PM:

" How can you make the comparison between a dessert bar and the smoking restriction? Overweight people eating desserts doesn't create second-hand fat or make you smell like cheesecake, although smelling like cheesecake would be better than smelling like wretched cigarette stench. I don't care that smokers are causing themselves harm by smoking, the same as I don't care how many desserts someone eats. What they put into their bodies is their choice, the only problem is that one habit directly affects others and one doesn't. "

To:smoker wrote on Jun 5, 2006 8:28 PM:

" Oops, heres another one. Ok education time. snack bar food only kills the person that eats it. The fat and sodium doesnt float through the room and get into other peoples systems. Are ya following? If you stinkin smokers kept the smoke in your lungs, I would invite you to smoke wherever your blacked lungs desire. Where does exhaled smoke go? Oh yeah, into my lungs. That is a personal attack on my health, an assault I guess you could say. DO YOU UNDERSTAND???? Nope "

From a smoker wrote on Jun 5, 2006 8:04 PM:

" If I can't smoke anyplace anymore do you think it would be OK to do meth instead, I don't see any signs in your horsepitals about that. Besides it is very popular now and cheap,no taxes or anything like that,any body can get contaminated and don't even know it,even in places that forbid smoking,at least with smoke you have some warning, so go ahead and ban smoking,something ten times worse will take it's place,non smokers will never get cancer or die,you convinced me. "

smoker wrote on Jun 5, 2006 6:23 PM:

" I feel the hospitals should get rid of the dessert bar also, there are many overweight people working at Gl & Fransiscan that are killing themselves also by eating the wrong things, also the peanuts in desserts, many people are allergic to peanuts yet I see them in many sweets. I feel the smokers AND visitors should use the designated area, employees don't smoke in front of the hospital the visitors do. I rather see one area, than butts all over the campus. "

To: give me a break wrote on Jun 5, 2006 6:11 PM:

" Please think about what you are saying. Your rights have NOT been taken away. You will be inconvienced. Oh well. You still have the right to choose to somke; however, you will have to find an off-campus place to do this. Smoking off campus-this is your right. You may not like this option, but you DO have a choice. So, really your rights have NOT been denied. When the government says that you may no longer legally purchase cigarettes, you then will have the right to whine that your rights have been taken away from you! In the meantime, choose to smoke. Smoke away- away from the hospital that is. "

Annoyed. wrote on Jun 5, 2006 5:53 PM:

" I am all for having a place for smokers to go at the hospital. 30 ft underground, no windows, no air vents, no air conditioner, dim light. Let them breath their own poison the whole time. "

To Unreal and smokers wrote on Jun 5, 2006 5:50 PM:

" That is probably the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Why couldnt you go smoke somewhere while your friend was dying of CANCER????? Are you @%!$#@ serious? Why didnt you ask your cancer dying friend if you could blow the cancer causing smoke in their face while they were dying??? You just dont get it. And your comparison to having to breath outside poison air is like saying because a soldier is forced into war,they should play Russian Roulette because there are bullets flying anyway. Oh yes whine, whine whine whine whine.( a smokers only insult word) "

RESPONSE TO: DON AND SUE AND UNREAL wrote on Jun 5, 2006 3:59 PM:

" Spelling and grammer is NOT the issue here,so get off it! I would'nt want you at my business with your so called "RIGHTOUS" attitude,and you and no-one else has the right to tell smokers they have no rights! If people would just open their eyes and minds,and realize,that there would be enough places for both smokers and non-smokers to go,have fun,BOWL (that's for Smoke Sucks),eat,drink etc. Why can't you see this????? Then the whole whining thing,on both parts would be done and everyone could be happy. I'm going to go have a smoke and why don't you go breathe some so called "FRESH" air,and we can both pollute our lungs. "

About time wrote on Jun 5, 2006 3:47 PM:

" If a restaurant or bar can be smoke free, then by all means a hospital should be smoke free. Rock on, GL! "

give me a break.... wrote on Jun 5, 2006 3:19 PM:

" promoting a healthy lifestyle is one thing, taking away smokers' rights is another thing. Next thing you know they are not going to allow you to take ibuprofen on their property because that could cause cancer and isn't healthy, or no motorcycles on campus because they are dangerous. If you get caught smoking on campus, will you get arrested? What about in your car? "

Relieve stress? wrote on Jun 5, 2006 2:59 PM:

" To those saying that these smokers are under stress and this makes them feel better...I know people that drink to make them feel better, is that right? There are others that cut themselves to feel better, shoot animals to feel better, beat their spouses and children to feel better. People have a right to smoke, yes...but not on medical center grounds. It is a place of help, health and healing. Maybe if you are stressed while at a place like this, you should take up their services that will find healthy ways to overcome your stress. "

Jason wrote on Jun 5, 2006 2:51 PM:

" This is exactly how it should be done. When a business decides to go smoke free they have every right to. However, government mandated regulations trying to step in because "they" know what is best for everyone is another form of control and another right taken away from the average person. I am not a smoker and don't like sitting next to someone who does while I'm trying to eat, but these government bans are eroding our freedoms slowly and surely "

Smoke Sucks wrote on Jun 5, 2006 2:40 PM:

" Great!!! Lets hope this catches on everywhere!!! I bowl for a hobby and am forced to become a smoker in my league. In a smoke filled room, everyone is smoking. "

About Time wrote on Jun 5, 2006 2:39 PM:

" Some of the poor nicotine addicts don't get it. Secondhand smoke is not only obnoxious it is a killer. Most non-smokers understand the dilemma the nicotine addicts face, but that does not equate to a "right" to smoke anywhere and everywhere. "

RD wrote on Jun 5, 2006 2:05 PM:

" Wow...no smoking at a hospital? It's good to know La Crosse is joining the 1980s. And, just a thought, smokers have no more of a "right" to smoke than I do to punch you in the gut. On second thought, you do have the right to smoke...in your own damn house where everybody else doesn't have to share that cigarette with you. "

judge the smoke - not the smoker wrote on Jun 5, 2006 1:46 PM:

" The whole smoke-free debate paints such an ugly picture of the smoker - they are a bad people who smoke just to polute the air, poison non-smokers and ruin their health. The smoker knows best that their habit is disgusting, expensive, HIGHLY ADDICTIVE and deadly. Have you ever talked to a smoker who is proud of their habit? I haven't. Let's keep the focus on a healthy environment for all - the hostility and finger pointing does not address the real issue. "

Non-smoker me wrote on Jun 5, 2006 1:16 PM:

" I don't like smelling the smoke, but how dangerous is it to breathe the second hand smoke for a couple seconds? I really don't think it will kill me or any one else any quicker. An all out ban on smoking on all grounds is too harse specially when some family members are going through high stress. "

Response to TO:DON AND SUE AND RESPONSE TO UNREAL wrote o