Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

i burn alot of inscence ..is the smoke from them bad like second hand smoke from cigs?

1 Answer

Relevance
  • MHF
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Depends on your definition of BAD. Anything short of breathing from an oxygen tank is bad (requires lungs to filter). However that would not immune your system to fight off foreign substances so that could be considered bad too. There's nothing special about second hand smoke despite how the media dramatizes it. Too much smoke in the air increases the risk of lung cancer and it doesn't matter where the smoke came from. However; You can choose to worry about every tiny bit of hazard in your life or take some perspective of the hazards. In that sense burning inscence or breathing a little second hand smoke is nothing to worry about. The EPA study showed the chance of a non-smoker who lived a lifetime with a smoker might get lung cancer due to the second hand smoke is 1 in 1000 exposed people. That study was dismissed for "cherry-picking" the numbers to lean towards an effective result. So, logic should tell most people, the hazard is nothing to fret about and is totally insignificant. The whole second hand smoke theory that rooted in the last 10yrs is complete political propaganda trying to be-rid the smokers in the world. Deep down we all know this, it's really obvious when you see 80yr old's smoking and find out the oldest living person in recorded history smoked.

    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.”

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.