Non-smoking dragon will help Blackwood shoppers quit

A DRAGON mascot will visit a supermarket in Blackwood on Sunday to help teach families about reducing children’s exposure to second-hand smoking in cars.

The Fresh Start Wales team and their mascot Patch the Dragon will be visiting ASDA Blackwood with a host of activities as part of a Welsh Government. Shoppers will be able to receive practical advice on where to get help to kick the habit.

A super-sized Health and Wealth Wheel will be on hand for smokers to estimate how much money they could save by quitting.

Families will also be able to test their carbon monoxide levels and lung capacity, while children can play with Patch and pick up a Fresh Start Frisbee to take home.

Research shows breathing in second-hand smoke can increase the risk of developing respiratory infections such as asthma, glue ear and serious illnesses such as meningitis, in children.

Children are particularly at risk from exposure to second-hand smoke, especially in vehicles where the confined space means it is too difficult for them to escape the 4,000 dangerous chemicals contained in tobacco smoke. It also shows that 80 per cent of cigarette smoke is invisible and can stay in the car up to two hours after you have put out a cigarette.

Fresh Start Wales will be at ASDA Blackwood from 10am. For more information, to request a Fresh Start pack or to sign the online pledge in support of the campaign visit Facebook.com/FreshStartWales or at www.freshstartwales.co.uk.

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:24pm Fri 14 Mar 14

endthelies says...

Aren't dragons known for their ability to smoke ? How are you going to teach children not to smoke with a mascot who looks as if they get through 60 a day.
Aren't dragons known for their ability to smoke ? How are you going to teach children not to smoke with a mascot who looks as if they get through 60 a day. endthelies
  • Score: -3

7:28am Sat 15 Mar 14

The FXR says...

Were it not for the asylum known as the World health organization, this article would be widely categorized immediately as a work of comedy and satire. With the more intelligent, already seeing the absurdity, of protecting a child riding in a car surrounded by thousands of other cars, powered by an internal combustion engine, who required protection, not from the exhaust being pumped out of that car, but from the smoke originating from a cigarette smoked within. Further to use the term "helping" someone to quit, while the author and his "movement" employer, are clearly trying to force someone to quit, as they put it at the WHO; "To make a smoker's life experience, so uncomfortable they will have no reasonable choice but to quit." . The part where this goes very wrong is in consideration of who is being targeted by this advertisement and who are it's victims, the elderly and the poor are damaged to the largest degree because in the largest proportions of those groups smoke, and the target of the ad campaign is not smokers but non smokers as an inspiration of hatred from a group identifying themselves as Doctors?

There is no mystery where that selfish lifestyle choice came from, and why Doctors were hanged in the end.
Were it not for the asylum known as the World health organization, this article would be widely categorized immediately as a work of comedy and satire. With the more intelligent, already seeing the absurdity, of protecting a child riding in a car surrounded by thousands of other cars, powered by an internal combustion engine, who required protection, not from the exhaust being pumped out of that car, but from the smoke originating from a cigarette smoked within. Further to use the term "helping" someone to quit, while the author and his "movement" employer, are clearly trying to force someone to quit, as they put it at the WHO; "To make a smoker's life experience, so uncomfortable they will have no reasonable choice but to quit." . The part where this goes very wrong is in consideration of who is being targeted by this advertisement and who are it's victims, the elderly and the poor are damaged to the largest degree because in the largest proportions of those groups smoke, and the target of the ad campaign is not smokers but non smokers as an inspiration of hatred from a group identifying themselves as Doctors? There is no mystery where that selfish lifestyle choice came from, and why Doctors were hanged in the end. The FXR
  • Score: 3

5:17pm Sat 15 Mar 14

Limestonecowboy says...

Children can't speak up or be aware of the dangers so if those around them don't take responsibility then legislation is the result.
Children can't speak up or be aware of the dangers so if those around them don't take responsibility then legislation is the result. Limestonecowboy
  • Score: 0

7:10am Sun 16 Mar 14

Michael J. McFadden says...

"Research shows... " eh? Funny how they like to leave out the details of that research, isn't it? There's a reason for leaving it out: there's no research AT ALL, EVER, ANYWHERE, showing any of the things they mention being related to the levels and durations of exposures kids would get in ordinary car rides.

Even for all-day, every-day exposure, the studies on asthma are mixed with some showing a reduction in asthma among certain groups of children exposed to smoke at home, glue-ear's relation is stronger but never really separated from parental respiratory conditions (Which Antismokers will obviously claim are much more prevalent in parents who smoke, right?), and meningitis.... meningitis??? This claim is so idiotic that I devoted a whole section to it in TobakkoNacht: "Brain Fever -- The Deadly Touch of a Smoker."

That particular study had to do with allowing one's children to be TOUCHED by smokers -- claiming that children tortured by such touches would die of a particularly deadly form of brain fever that occurs in something like one child out of every three million in the back woods of the outback in Australia. Of course some of the little details, stuff like "one in three million children" or the "outback of Australia" or simply the complete lack of support for such a wacky idea from anywhere except this one oddball study -- none of that information ever made it out to the general media that likes to just yell about smokers giving children painful diseases and deaths.

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "TobakkoNacht -- The Antismoking Endgame"
"Research shows... " eh? Funny how they like to leave out the details of that research, isn't it? There's a reason for leaving it out: there's no research AT ALL, EVER, ANYWHERE, showing any of the things they mention being related to the levels and durations of exposures kids would get in ordinary car rides. Even for all-day, every-day exposure, the studies on asthma are mixed with some showing a reduction in asthma among certain groups of children exposed to smoke at home, glue-ear's relation is stronger but never really separated from parental respiratory conditions (Which Antismokers will obviously claim are much more prevalent in parents who smoke, right?), and meningitis.... meningitis??? This claim is so idiotic that I devoted a whole section to it in TobakkoNacht: "Brain Fever -- The Deadly Touch of a Smoker." That particular study had to do with allowing one's children to be TOUCHED by smokers -- claiming that children tortured by such touches would die of a particularly deadly form of brain fever that occurs in something like one child out of every three million in the back woods of the outback in Australia. Of course some of the little details, stuff like "one in three million children" or the "outback of Australia" or simply the complete lack of support for such a wacky idea from anywhere except this one oddball study -- none of that information ever made it out to the general media that likes to just yell about smokers giving children painful diseases and deaths. Michael J. McFadden Author of "TobakkoNacht -- The Antismoking Endgame" Michael J. McFadden
  • Score: -1

1:18pm Sun 16 Mar 14

The FXR says...

Curious those advocating "protection" from tobacco smoke, have not produced a statistical list of other contenders so that people could see by direct comparison, the "lifetime risks" of such things as chemical exposures, drug side effects, medical interventions, the calcium added to drinking water, benzine in gasoline or simply the exposures to diesel or auto exhaust.

Such a list would be self defeating to the "movement" because of all the "risk factors" it would be very difficult to find other factors that played a lesser role in reduced longevity. How many could they even name, that fall below the statistical risk of tobacco smoke on a list? With numbers among tobacco smoke research consistently seen in decimal point increased outcomes, you would be hard pressed to even find one in a published study with a risk below 1 in 10,000. Of those that do exist in the research they are defined in the conclusions as nothing to merit any level of worry or concern. The drug trials actually use the low levels of risk increase as a selling point to gain a place on the shelf.

But then manipulating and massaging the science, is all they really ever had and just look how much it got them, by marketing little wisps of smoke.
Curious those advocating "protection" from tobacco smoke, have not produced a statistical list of other contenders so that people could see by direct comparison, the "lifetime risks" of such things as chemical exposures, drug side effects, medical interventions, the calcium added to drinking water, benzine in gasoline or simply the exposures to diesel or auto exhaust. Such a list would be self defeating to the "movement" because of all the "risk factors" it would be very difficult to find other factors that played a lesser role in reduced longevity. How many could they even name, that fall below the statistical risk of tobacco smoke on a list? With numbers among tobacco smoke research consistently seen in decimal point increased outcomes, you would be hard pressed to even find one in a published study with a risk below 1 in 10,000. Of those that do exist in the research they are defined in the conclusions as nothing to merit any level of worry or concern. The drug trials actually use the low levels of risk increase as a selling point to gain a place on the shelf. But then manipulating and massaging the science, is all they really ever had and just look how much it got them, by marketing little wisps of smoke. The FXR
  • Score: -1

12:18am Fri 21 Mar 14

Michael J. McFadden says...

80% of cigarette smoke is invisible eh? That's fairly true, although actually the figure, according to the Surgeon Generals Reports is closer to 90%. And it's invisible because it's composed of ordinary air gases like nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and water vapor. Of course "Fresh Start Wales" would never pass that information along in its propaganda piece here: it would have spoiled the effect, right?

- MJM
80% of cigarette smoke is invisible eh? That's fairly true, although actually the figure, according to the Surgeon Generals Reports is closer to 90%. And it's invisible because it's composed of ordinary air gases like nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and water vapor. Of course "Fresh Start Wales" would never pass that information along in its propaganda piece here: it would have spoiled the effect, right? - MJM Michael J. McFadden
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree