“Amazing all these deaths are ending in 000 , seems if they were actually counting it would be more like 601,42...”
Any reputable scientist knows that numerical data are useless without error bars, and in a study as chockfull of variables and unknowns as “the number of deaths due to second-hand smoke”, those error bars have to be substantial, and probably enormous.
I’m guessing the meaningful number, with error bars, is something more like 600,000 (+/- 600,000).
In other words, the number is essentially worthless (as substantiated by the data referred to in reply #50).