Posted on 12/20/2013 8:27:07 AM PST by rktman
Now it can be told. Now that smoking has been banned everywhere but the dryer vent at your apartment based on the notion that secondhand smoke kills everyone around you, The Journal of the National Cancer Institute can tell us this via Jacob Sullum:
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
One tobacco plant can produce up to 100 cigarettes.
/johnny
That’s “unsettling”.
Indeed not one case has been proved that secondhand smoke kills it’s just an agenda for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
After watching my father in law die from complications of emphysema, I have a profound bias against tobacco.
This is a product designed to addict children before they are capable of making an informed opinion about whether they want to live a life of lessened physical capacity and eventual debilitating disease.
I can forgive people who grow their own tobacco and never expose others, but anyone who smokes in public or purchases cigarettes is a willing accomplice to the corruption of our youth.
Its interesting that this subject has come up. I remember reading an article a long time ago, that, in part, cast doubt on the idea that cigarettes caused cancer to the degree that was claimed (and made a point similar to yours — smoking is involved in lung cancer, but not the cause). This was a mainstream medical article, and seemed credible. The following point was not the main point in the article, and had an otherwise anti-smoking theme.
Apparently, there were a lot of studies back in the 60s and 70s which calculated the expected drop in lung cancer, correlated to various scenarios in terms of reduction of usage. The articles’ point is that we have seen a reduction in usage, but the drop in lung cancer (both incidence, and fatalities), hasn’t been nearly as significant as expected. The result has been in a reduction in lung cancer among smokers (due to fewer smokers, but I do remember that the rate had also changed, but can’t remember which way), but an increase in lung cancer among non-smokers (by number, but also by rate, by a non-trivial amount).
Given that this article was at least 15 years ago, and I only remember bits and pieces of it, I was curious if anyone knows whether it has any validity to it.
That's five packs - which would have lasted me 2 days in my heyday.
True. They claim mouth, esophageal and even bladder (!?) cancer is affected by smoking, but have demonstrated no causal mechanism.
The 17%-claim, by itself, seems to prove that 83% of smokers (at least as of the study-date) either didn’t contract lung cancer...
Exactly.
Cancer-rate is significantly different from lung cancer-rate.
Correct; it would be much higher.
AGW, SECOND HAND SMOKE, FOREIGNER CARE, The left exists only until their lies are exposed.
You have a good point, and it would help justify illegals’ violent acts in the US.
What percentage of people mugged, raped or murdered would have been mugged, raped or murdered if the illegals weren’t here?
As someone who quit in 1984, I must say that I enjoy the smell of frsh cigarette/cigar/pipe smoke but, like you, I don’t find it pleasing to smeall the residual in someone’s hair or on their clothes.
Once I hit 90-years-old, I’ll probably take up cigars.
_________________________________________________________
Same here, I like an occasional whiff of smoke. But then again, I like a whiff of gasoline when I fill my car.
Quit smoking 40 years ago, and might take it up again someday. I had an uncle who smoked until he was 92 and drank whiskey every day. We’re not going to live forever, so maybe should enjoy some simple pleasures when we get old enough that it will not impact our lives very much.
anecdote:
I am a smoker. My last cat lived to be 20. The present cat is 16 and healthy.
3rd hand smoke issue.
Would be the odor that one smells, on clothes, hair, in a car, etc. In a Liberal mind, just smelling the odor is hazardous even with no 2nd hand smoke present
Scientific evidence in their feeble little minds.
ok.
Now please explain beer and hard liquor. Please explain Liquor stores. Please explain bars. Please explain DUI. Ever stand next to a wino?
At least smokers are honest and not hypocrites. They found a safe solution and yet that solution is not good enough.
If 2 men are admitted to the hospital with heart attacks, same age, one smoked, one didn’t, the smoker’s heart attack will be blamed on smoking.
so what do ya want me to bring, beer or wine?
According to the 2012 Surgeon General’s Report, very few people start smoking after age 25. Nearly 9 out of 10 adult smokers started by age 18, and 99% started by age 26. Anyone who has witnessed adolescent peer pressure knows exactly why children start smoking. And without packaged cigarettes, smoking would be much less practical for children.
Children cannot get cigarettes without adults providing access. Virtually all smoking adults are participants in this corruption to a degree, either by being a poor role model or actively or passively providing access.
Incidentally, smoking was not known in Europe until the 1520’s and people managed just fine before then. And tobacco was the reason slavery was first introduced to Virginia.
Just because your obvious bias does not allow you to accept the truth, doesn’t make you any less wrong.
Anyone that drives a car is a willing accomplice to murder.
Makes about as much sense.
Your outrage has been noted and filed where appropriate.
/johnny
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.