Why are some people so ignorant about smoking?
Lie #1; 80 - 90% of smokers get lung cancer (Not even close)
Only 70 out of 100,000 people get lung cancer which is seriously less than the smoking rate.
%0.005 of US population affected by lung cancer or (1 in 1904)
-- Of the few who do get Lung Cancer
60% of lung cancers diagnosed are never smokers or quit smoking
40% are currently smokers
http://lungcancer.about.com/od/whatislungcancer/f/lungcancerdeaths.htm
lung cancer accounts for only 2% of the annual deaths worldwide and only 3% in the US
According to WHO/CDC Data
http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/editorials/vol-1/e1-4.htm
In Japan Non-Smokers have a HIGHER risk of lung cancer than smokers do
"Lung cancer mortality of our Japanese sample was lower among current smokers and higher among non-smokers regardless of age and sex."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15723657?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=3&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed
Lie #2 - Secondhand smoke is harmful (Only if you'd call dust a serious harm also)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2927994/pdf/1471-2407-10-285.pdf
“Among never smokers in our population, we observed no association between either exposure to ETS at home or at the workplace and lung cancer risk”(p. 5)
“Our results support the concept that exposure to exhaust fumes and or soot/smoke (***from non-tobacco
sources***) is a source of carcinogenic exposure.” (p. 7)
“ETS exposure was not found to significantly increase risk among never smokers in this study”(p.7)
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057
“No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke before or after adjusting for seven confounders and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease. No significant associations were found during the shorter follow up periods of 1960-5, 1966-72, 1973-85, and 1973-98.”
Lie #3 - Anyone who says otherwise works for the tobacco company (Dare to dream)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2173898/
"These stories suggest a willingness of influential anti-tobacco activists, including academics, to hurt legitimate scientists and turn epidemiology into junk science in order to further their agendas. "
Why are some people so set on being ignorant about the truth?