LIRR sued for affects of second-hand smoke

Full story: Newsday

A former Long Island Rail Road conductor is suing the railroad for $10 million, claiming his cancer was caused by 14 years of exposure to second-hand smoke in designated smoking cars, which were banned by the ...
Comments
101 - 120 of 120 Comments Last updated Jul 19, 2012
First Prev
of 6
Next Last
Sheri

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#110
Jul 29, 2007
 
Sue to stop smoking wrote:
<quoted text>
Unlikely as it is easily rebutted. Good thing for LIRR you are not on their team.
Rebuff it please, NOW. I suppose that somehow your intelligence outshines this researcher and publisher of the study as well as the BMJ. Do you seriously believe that just because you say it is so that it is? What are your credentials? What studies did you conduct? Take your ignorance and your false sense of superiority and go away.
Sue to stop smoking

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#111
Jul 29, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
Rebuff it please, NOW. I suppose that somehow your intelligence outshines this researcher and publisher of the study as well as the BMJ. Do you seriously believe that just because you say it is so that it is? What are your credentials? What studies did you conduct? Take your ignorance and your false sense of superiority and go away.
I said rebuTT, not rebuFF. Major difference. The article is a defense of his opinions. "The attack described above was quite startling to me as someone whose honesty and scientific integrity had not been questioned in the 33-year period from July 1970, when I received my Ph.D.(26), until May 2003" Who really cares whether or not it was quite startling to him? Others, including posters here have responded to articles in the BMJ which support the evidence that second hand smoke does harm people. That statement has nothing to do with the responses to his article. His attacks on the ACS have nothing to do with his article. He needs to keep personal feelings out of his research and his responses to his critics or his credibility comes into question. The attacks on the ACS and his critics have no place in the courtroom. Scientific studies do. There will be studies showing that SHS harms. There will also be studies that do not show a link between SHS and illness. The tobacco company documents, which are online, will also be introduced, because they show that the tobacco companies have been aware of the link between smoking (and second hand smoke) and illness. You are free to look at that yourself. It is lengthy. Evidence that the LIRR knew that exposure to second hand smoke could be dangerous belong in the courtroom. The employee's lifestyle obviously will come up. The union and the union's stance on the smoking cars will also come into question. Do any members of the employee's family smoke, and if so, did they smoke around him? Did he hang out in smoking bars, etc? LIRR lawyers will try and get jury members who do not believe that smoking is harmful. The employee's lawyers will try and get jury members who have lost a loved one to smoking. Remember, LIRR does not have to prove that SHS is not harmful. They just have to prove that they were not liable. The employee may be able to prove that SHS is harmful and still not be able to prove that LIRR was liable for his illness. It is a lot easier to prove liability in a class action case than it is in a single case like this. The reason is that the more individuals that suffer from an illness, despite the many differences in background and lifestyle, the more indicative it is that the illness is caused by a single thing. That is why the stewardesses were able to win their case. The other thing is that this is a civil case and not a criminal case. Therefore the burden of proof is considerably less on the part of the employee and if the jury believes that LIRR acted negligently they can award him damages. The article you gave really has nothing to do with a court action of this type.
Sue to stop smoking

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#112
Jul 29, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
Rebuff it please, NOW. I suppose that somehow your intelligence outshines this researcher and publisher of the study as well as the BMJ. Do you seriously believe that just because you say it is so that it is? What are your credentials? What studies did you conduct? Take your ignorance and your false sense of superiority and go away.
By the way, I am published. My research is not in the area of tobacco. This is not a court of law. I am not required to prove my credentials here. Doing so would take far more space than topix allows. This case will be decided on it's merits in a court of law. I can see where both sides may have an advantage. I can also see where this lawsuit is only the tip of the iceberg. As more and more people fall victim to the illnesses that are linked to smoking, a significant number of them will seek the assistance of lawyers to make sure that their families are provided for. Insurance companies will no longer accept the risk of covering businesses that allow smoking and you will see smoking dissapear in the workplace once and for all.
Sue to stop smoking

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#113
Jul 29, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
Rebuff it please, NOW. I suppose that somehow your intelligence outshines this researcher and publisher of the study as well as the BMJ. Do you seriously believe that just because you say it is so that it is? What are your credentials? What studies did you conduct? Take your ignorance and your false sense of superiority and go away.
See what the courts are saying about tobacco and liability
http://www.tobacco.neu.edu/
Sue to stop smoking

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#114
Jul 29, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
Rebuff it please, NOW. I suppose that somehow your intelligence outshines this researcher and publisher of the study as well as the BMJ. Do you seriously believe that just because you say it is so that it is? What are your credentials? What studies did you conduct? Take your ignorance and your false sense of superiority and go away.
See what the lawyers are saying
http://tobacco.neu.edu/conference/index.html
http://www.whkpa.com/tobacco.html
http://www.thetortellini.com/2007/02/tobacco_...
http://www.phaionline.org/category/tobacco/
http://www.iliberty.org/debates/id.3283/debat...
Nemo31

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#115
Jul 29, 2007
 
Sue to stop smoking wrote:
The first in the list tobacco.neu is PHAI NPO sponsored and fiancanced by the ROBERT WOODS JOHNSON FOUNDATION. The funny thing about RWJF is that they love to make trial lawyers rich and paying for plantiffs lawsuits against tobacco. then they turn around and fund nonprofits to lobby for "health courts" because those same evil trial lawyers are running up the cost of law suits when it comes to the medical porfessions which includes Big Pharma as in Johnson & Johnson. "Health Courts would make it much more difficult for persons to exercise 7th ammendents roghts by jury of peers in civil matters. Such as medical malpractice which would include Big Pharma. The basis of the health court would be that judges would be specially trained in health matters. Who will train them? the health care/medical/pharma industrial complex. Yeah these people are out to protect us--much sarcasm!
Who Cares

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#116
Aug 2, 2007
 
Smoking causes SIDS. Plain and simple. If you do not smoke around your infants, they are more likely to not have SIDS. With erectile dysfunction it is amazing that some smokers have kids at all. Smoking also causes low birthweight babies which in and of itself is a risk factor for death or other health problems. Smoking around kids causes cognitive deficits, which may explain why some of these smokers whose parents smoked just don't get it. Smoking around kids causes asthma too. That is a risk factor for early death. Not to mention the effects of having to repeatedly breathe second hand smoke for years upon years. By the time the child moves out of the house, they have already "smoked" for 18 years. And because their parents were bad role models they think that it is okay to smoke, so they do it too. By the time they are 40 things like breast cancer (has a strong positive correlation with smoking) start to occur. They have evidence of COPD becuase they have been smoking for 40 years. By the time they are 60 they have lung cancer and a host of other disorders, including COPD. Since they smoke, the original parents are unlikely to have as many grandchildren because of the effects of smoking on the reproductive system including impotence and early menopause. It will not happen with every child, but smoking when you are pregnant, smoking around the child as an infant and then smoking around the child as they are growing up significantly increases the risk that the child that was so hard to concieve in the first place will live to see adulthood and increases the risk that the same child will be a lot less likely to see retirement than the non smoking peers.

Smokers must be sick and twisted addicts to IGNORE all of the evidence that they are hurting their children. Smokers continue to insist that smoking does not hurt the people that are around smoking.

There are lots of families out there with graves of infants who died from SIDS, children who died from asthma attacks and adult children who died of heart or breathing difficulties that could be attributed to smoking and second hand smoke.

But oh no. Smokers are such sick twisted addicts that they will still put their kids in danger. Not only that, they are willing to put everybody's kids in danger just so they can suck on a paper tube filled with tobacco with a fire at one end and a fool at the other.

Second hand smoke is child abuse. It kills kids. Maybe we need to realize that smoking parents do not care about their kids and take their kids away from them.
Bimbo Island

Newtown, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#117
Aug 2, 2007
 
David Hepburn sound like a real loser.
Sheri

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#118
Aug 2, 2007
 
Who Cares wrote:
Smoking causes SIDS. Plain and simple. If you do not smoke around your infants, they are more likely to not have SIDS. With erectile dysfunction it is amazing that some smokers have kids at all. Smoking also causes low birthweight babies which in and of itself is a risk factor for death or other health problems. Smoking around kids causes cognitive deficits, which may explain why some of these smokers whose parents smoked just don't get it. Smoking around kids causes asthma too. That is a risk factor for early death. Not to mention the effects of having to repeatedly breathe second hand smoke for years upon years. By the time the child moves out of the house, they have already "smoked" for 18 years. And because their parents were bad role models they think that it is okay to smoke, so they do it too. By the time they are 40 things like breast cancer (has a strong positive correlation with smoking) start to occur. They have evidence of COPD becuase they have been smoking for 40 years. By the time they are 60 they have lung cancer and a host of other disorders, including COPD. Since they smoke, the original parents are unlikely to have as many grandchildren because of the effects of smoking on the reproductive system including impotence and early menopause. It will not happen with every child, but smoking when you are pregnant, smoking around the child as an infant and then smoking around the child as they are growing up significantly increases the risk that the child that was so hard to concieve in the first place will live to see adulthood and increases the risk that the same child will be a lot less likely to see retirement than the non smoking peers.
Smokers must be sick and twisted addicts to IGNORE all of the evidence that they are hurting their children. Smokers continue to insist that smoking does not hurt the people that are around smoking.
There are lots of families out there with graves of infants who died from SIDS, children who died from asthma attacks and adult children who died of heart or breathing difficulties that could be attributed to smoking and second hand smoke.
But oh no. Smokers are such sick twisted addicts that they will still put their kids in danger. Not only that, they are willing to put everybody's kids in danger just so they can suck on a paper tube filled with tobacco with a fire at one end and a fool at the other.
Second hand smoke is child abuse. It kills kids. Maybe we need to realize that smoking parents do not care about their kids and take their kids away from them.
ONCE AGAIN, you are an ignorant piece of work. Tell that to my family who lost my 9 week old sister to SIDS. Absolutely, no one in my family smoked. However, my baby sister was still dead. My mom still grieves for her.

“take a deep breath”

Since: Jul 07

Huntington Station, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#119
Aug 3, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
ONCE AGAIN, you are an ignorant piece of work. Tell that to my family who lost my 9 week old sister to SIDS. Absolutely, no one in my family smoked. However, my baby sister was still dead. My mom still grieves for her.
While it is misleading to say that smoking causes SIDS, it has been shown to be one of many factors that can increase the risk of SIDS. I'm very sorry for your loss, and I understand it was not smoking related, but in other cases, smoking has been a factor. Not smoking around a baby will reduce, not eliminate, their risk. I'm sure you would want that for other moms and sisters out there.

My heart goes out to you and your family.
just candid

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#120
Aug 3, 2007
 
Anyone who promotes smoking should be put in jail.
Sheri

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#121
Aug 3, 2007
 
New to LI wrote:
<quoted text>
While it is misleading to say that smoking causes SIDS, it has been shown to be one of many factors that can increase the risk of SIDS. I'm very sorry for your loss, and I understand it was not smoking related, but in other cases, smoking has been a factor. Not smoking around a baby will reduce, not eliminate, their risk. I'm sure you would want that for other moms and sisters out there.
My heart goes out to you and your family.
Listen, I do have a brain. I did not smoke around my children when they were babies. That SIDS theory has been somewhat like the constant wavering between whether coffee is good or bad for you. Sometimes it is bad, and then a new study will say that it causes no harm. SIDS happens to parents who are non-smokers and to parents who are smokers. It does not discriminate. My personal theory is that something unrecognizable, such as sleep apnea is present in the infant. Because the child is so little and has some underdeveloped organs, he might just forget to breathe and cannot recover from it.

“take a deep breath”

Since: Jul 07

Huntington Station, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#122
Aug 3, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen, I do have a brain. I did not smoke around my children when they were babies. That SIDS theory has been somewhat like the constant wavering between whether coffee is good or bad for you. Sometimes it is bad, and then a new study will say that it causes no harm. SIDS happens to parents who are non-smokers and to parents who are smokers. It does not discriminate. My personal theory is that something unrecognizable, such as sleep apnea is present in the infant. Because the child is so little and has some underdeveloped organs, he might just forget to breathe and cannot recover from it.
I didn't say you were stupid and I didn't say that smoking caused SIDS. I said that smoking has been shown to reduce the risk of SIDS.

I saw that you were upset with the other poster who said that smoking causes SIDS. My attempt was to mediate between her misrepresentation and you emotions, because there is something valuable in each of your perspectives that should be preserved.

The poster who said that SIDS is caused by smoking is wrong to say that, because, as you are well aware, we don't know the cause. But there is value in the suggestion that parents may want to prctice some risk managment by avoiding known risk factors, such as smoking.

While it's true that SIDS has claimed babies in non-smoking homes, babies who were put to sleep on their backs, with no pillows or blankets, parents can still reduce risk by managing known risk factors, of which smoking IS one.

Here's a great link on this: http://sids-network.org/experts/smoking.htm

Your post is valuable because it shows a deeper understanding of SIDS, but personally I felt it was unreasonable to dismiss smoking as a risk factor.

I didn't mean to make you defensive.
Sheri

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#123
Aug 3, 2007
 
New to LI wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say you were stupid and I didn't say that smoking caused SIDS. I said that smoking has been shown to reduce the risk of SIDS.
I saw that you were upset with the other poster who said that smoking causes SIDS. My attempt was to mediate between her misrepresentation and you emotions, because there is something valuable in each of your perspectives that should be preserved.
The poster who said that SIDS is caused by smoking is wrong to say that, because, as you are well aware, we don't know the cause. But there is value in the suggestion that parents may want to prctice some risk managment by avoiding known risk factors, such as smoking.
While it's true that SIDS has claimed babies in non-smoking homes, babies who were put to sleep on their backs, with no pillows or blankets, parents can still reduce risk by managing known risk factors, of which smoking IS one.
Here's a great link on this: http://sids-network.org/experts/smoking.htm
Your post is valuable because it shows a deeper understanding of SIDS, but personally I felt it was unreasonable to dismiss smoking as a risk factor.
I didn't mean to make you defensive.
I did not dismiss it. I also did not smoke around my infants...just in case I was wrong. I also slept with my children in a crib right beside me so that I could reach over and feel their back to make sure they were breathing. I slept little when they were little because I was always checking them. I appreciate your post in light of the horrible comments of the other anti smoker. NOTHING in my life has ever been more important to me than my children's welfare.

“take a deep breath”

Since: Jul 07

Huntington Station, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#124
Aug 3, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
I did not dismiss it. I also did not smoke around my infants...just in case I was wrong. I also slept with my children in a crib right beside me so that I could reach over and feel their back to make sure they were breathing. I slept little when they were little because I was always checking them. I appreciate your post in light of the horrible comments of the other anti smoker. NOTHING in my life has ever been more important to me than my children's welfare.
I never thought that you or your family smoked or did anything but the best for your family. That's not what I meant. Obviously, you're an educated family who did all the right things and still suffered a horrible tragedy. If you were not dismissing smoker as a factor in your reply to the other poster, I misunderstood, and I'm glad you were not.

I lost a baby in a car accident. It was the other driver's fault. We did everything right. I can relate.
Sheri

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#125
Aug 3, 2007
 
New to LI wrote:
<quoted text>
I never thought that you or your family smoked or did anything but the best for your family. That's not what I meant. Obviously, you're an educated family who did all the right things and still suffered a horrible tragedy. If you were not dismissing smoker as a factor in your reply to the other poster, I misunderstood, and I'm glad you were not.
I lost a baby in a car accident. It was the other driver's fault. We did everything right. I can relate.
NOTHING in life can be worse than losing a child. God Bless You.
just candid

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#126
Aug 4, 2007
 
Pity pathetic nicotine addicts and their offspring.

“take a deep breath”

Since: Jul 07

Huntington Station, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#127
Aug 4, 2007
 
Sheri wrote:
<quoted text>
NOTHING in life can be worse than losing a child. God Bless You.
Thank you. If it weren't for my 3-year-old son, I don't know what would have happened to me. Best to you.
Sheri

Cuyahoga Falls, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#128
Aug 4, 2007
 
New to LI wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you. If it weren't for my 3-year-old son, I don't know what would have happened to me. Best to you.
You are blessed to have each other. My two kids are now 18 and 14. My daughter leaves for college in SC in 10 days, and although I have been preparing for that moment for a long time, I panic when I think of her actually gone from home. Can't let her know that because she is super excited, and letting go is what all good parents must do, but still... I hope not to smother my son with attention after she leaves LOL Take care.
Rich

Farmingville, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#129
Jul 19, 2012
 
I know him and he is! Guy smoked pot for 20 years. He is a SOB.
Bimbo Island wrote:
David Hepburn sound like a real loser.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••

Newark News Video

•••
•••

Newark Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Newark People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Newark News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Newark
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••