www.public4you.fora.pl

tonyrszvwm

State lawmakers, the court found, “reasonably may have been endeavoring to protect the financial investment and settled expectations of members of private clubs.”
It took some time, but bar owners and patrons have gotten used to the smoking ban,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], said Nicole Griffin, executive director of the Connecticut Restaurant Association [ [link widoczny dla zalogowanych]].
Smoking bans in private clubs, Griffin said, “are a natural next step.”
Then again, not every bar that’s supposed to be smoke-free is heeding the law, said Robin Potwora of Torrington, who headed a group of smokers opposed to the ban several years ago.
“There are still people who completely ignore it,” Potwora said. “I wouldn’t blow the whistle on them, but they’re there.”
Smoke-free private clubs were not part of the picture when the state legislature approved the bar and restaurant smoking ban in 2003. Opponents predicted that bar patrons, especially customers of working-class taverns, would flock to the private clubs where they could relax indoors with a beer and a butt.
A group of especially frustrated bar owners tried to get the state law declared unconstitutional, but the state Supreme Court in 2007 upheld the ban and the legislature’s exemption of private clubs and casinos.
State lawmakers, the court found,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], “reasonably may have been endeavoring to protect the financial investment and settled expectations of members of private clubs.”
It took some time, but bar owners and patrons have gotten used to the smoking ban, said Nicole Griffin,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], executive director of the Connecticut Restaurant Association [ [link widoczny dla zalogowanych]].
Smoking bans in private clubs, Griffin said, “are a natural next step.”
Then again, not every bar that’s supposed to be smoke-free is heeding the law, said Robin Potwora of Torrington,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], who headed a group of smokers opposed to the ban several years ago.
“There are still people who completely ignore it,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],” Potwora said. “I wouldn’t blow the whistle on them, but they’re there.”
Legitimate,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], objective scientific data should be a critically important component in this regulatory proceeding,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], just as it should be in any other FDA proceeding that deals with drugs or medical devices. Our nation is built on the foundation that regulatory agencies must base their decisions on the best science available. Good science should not become “science that supports what we want to do.”
Good science should seek to apply rigorous empiricism to marshal relevant facts. That type of science should be paramount in the FDA’s process, not anecdotal or behavioral surveys that are subject to bias and cannot be replicated.