Passive smoking; is it just a smokescreen?

I suppose it must be rather obvious that taking smoke of any kind through your lungs for a life time is not going to do you a lot of good.I dont need to be a medical person to know that! However it does seem strange in an age that I can easy remember almost every-one smoked like chimneys, smoked related diseases didnt seem to have been any worse? We would have expected people to drop like flies but cancer was no worse than today.?

My Father was an insulation engineer and contracter and worked with Asbestos from being a teenager yet he died of Cancer not of the lungs but the Pancreas.

I have never smoked personally. but have never been convinced smoking has a direct effect on actual cancer,and its caused an awful lot of pubs to close..

I think Sal here has hit the nail on the head. Whether or not passive smoking kills, personally, as an ex-smoker, all be it years and years ago, I loath the smell of cigarettes (cigars fine!!) and don't see why I should be expected to breath in the smoke from cigarettes smoked by others. If they want to kill themselves, that's their business. Just don't involve me.

While many people cite Mr. Castle as an example, did anyone bother to study the bar personnel who were also breathing in passive smoke regularly. How many of them died from smoking related illnesses? I agree that smoking kills but with passive smoke, although nasty, I am not convinced. I am a non smoker by the way. People say that they do not want to breathe in someones passive smoke yet in confined spaces we are breathing in their stale exhaled breath, which sometimes can be just as nauseating.

Let me say up front that I am a smoker and I am also a midwife, having said that a global study some year ago reckon that 600,000 people are killed around the world from passive smoking. Passive smoking is as dangerous as smoking. I chose to smoke but I will not smoke around my grandchildren or any child for that matter, I do not smoke in my friends home that do not smoke and I never smoke in my car.

Because I am aware of the dangers of passive smoking, I will not endanger people around me, I chose to smoke and that is my right, I do not have the right to endanger others.

To answer your question passive smoking is no 'smokescreen'

Whichever stance you take on the whole passive smoking/ cancer debate, I don't see why I should have to breath in someones second hand smoke. If people want to pollute their lungs with toxins then it is their right, but they do not have the right to inflict it on bystanders in public places.

This article was written almost 8 years ago and is just the opinion of one man but he's not a doctor so it's about as informed as my answer which is no, it is not just a smokescreen, passive smoking claims lives

Why the Telegraph article from 8 years ago ?? - most people like the smell of fresh air

the best thank you to circumvent the passive smoking is to pass all of the situations and the situations the place smoking is achieved by way of the human beings who smoke. there are various reliable business enterprise who're very helpful by way of nature connect such communities. attempt to place across the undesirable consequences of smokings to clientele in simple terms.

Tell that to Roy Castle's family...Mr Castle had never smoked, but said he contracted his illness after years of playing in smoky jazz clubs early in his career.

He said in a documentary about his disease: "Whilst playing the trumpet in smoky rooms I inhaled great gulps of air - you have to fill your lungs."

http://uk.images.search.yahoo.com/search/images?_a...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Castle

Inhaling smoke, any smoke is bad, it's as simple as that.

There's nothing mysterious about it.