Jon Krueger
Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
Big Tobacco Spends Big On Ads Against Tobacco Tax
So, "Californians Against" turns out to be 5 out-of-stage cigarette companies. Telling us how to run our health policy. Apparently they're just the expertise we were looking for. Ya think?— April 24, 2012 2:14 a.m.
Tony Gwynn got salivary gland cancer but won't denounce chewing tobacco
Are spit and snus the harm reduction we've been waiting for? 1. Spit ("smokeless") tobacco has 100 to 1,000 times more tobacco-specific carcinogens than any other consumer product intended for oral use: http://www.cancerpage.com/news/article.asp?id=9050 Sure, it's less harmful than cigarettes -- but almost anything is less harmful than cigarettes. Fen-phen is less harmful than cigarettes. 2. What's being peddled in the US as "snus" is not the same as Swedish snus: http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/5/1/9 Marlboro snus is not snus. So the Swedish experience, however interesting, is not relevant. 3. The elephant in the room is dual use. Spit and snus are a way to keep smokers smoking. Philip Morris explicitly markets its suck tobacco product for dual use: Whenever smoking isn't an option, reach for Marlboro snus Rides alongside your smokes: Marlboro snus Made for smokers: Marlboro snus! For Philip Morris, spit and snus are a way around smoking bans. So spit and snus have potential to increase smoking, by undermining quitting. These facts do not support the argument that snus and spit are the harm reduction we've been waiting for.— March 16, 2012 9:48 a.m.