Based on the lack of scientific evidence, there is no conclusive evidence that says secondhand smoke causes cancer.
In recent years, the smoking cause cancer debate secondhand smoke has been discussed and debated endlessly. Here in Ontario, Canada, the government recently passed a law to ban people from smoking in all public places, including bars and restaurants smoking cause cancer.
The new control law called snuff smoking ban in the province of Ontario, as well as those that prohibit smoking in public places smoking cause cancer, bans snuff smoking in your workplace too.
Similar legislation has also been introduced in many parts of the United States
There have been dozens of scientific studies linking second hand to everything from asthma to heart disease. However smoking cause cancer, the "effect" largest and most controversial of secondhand smoke has been its relationship with cancer.
But is there any scientific evidence that passive smoking causes cancer in non-smokers? The short answer is no.
One of the most smoking cause cancer used on the effects of secondhand smoke studies was conducted by Protection Agency (EPA) in a report entitled Respiratory effects of passive smoking: lung cancer and other diseases, published in 1992. On the basis of the information at this time, reports on the conclusion that secondhand smoke is responsible for 3,000 deaths in nonsmokers each smoking cause cancer year.
However, in 1998 smoking cause cancer, a federal court in the United States found that the EPA has shown no link between secondhand smoke and cancer. In addition, the court held that the EPA "..." cherry picked "data" to reach your predetermined conclusion. In other words, they lied smoking cause cancer.
And yet, even after a federal court ruled the report is bad complex organizations like the American Cancer Society and the smoking cause cancer American Lung Association use the EPA study as a primary source to prove that secondhand smoke smoke causes cancer.
Even Health Canada smoking cause cancer Web site in a report entitled Protection of secondhand smoke in Ontario: a review of the evidence on best practices, the main source of "data" has the same EPA study that was rejected by a Federal Court. However, this has been used as evidence that secondhand smoke causes cancer and should be banned, saying "any involuntary tobacco smoke exposure is harmful and should be smoking cause cancer removed."
Interestingly, several referenced in the Smoke Free Ontario site links were either broken or not connected to the reference article.
So even with a study smoking cause cancer that led to a conclusion based on insufficient data and predetermined conclusions, places like Ontario have yielded to political and public pressure to ban smoking in workplaces and public places to reduce the risk of cancer caused by secondhand smoke.
In a study published on 17 May 2003 smoking cause cancer, the British Medical Journal, the researchers found no link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer.
"We found no measurable smoking cause cancer effect of exposure to secondhand smoke and an increased risk of heart disease and lung cancer risk in nonsmokers - not at any time or at any level," lead researcher James Angstrom, PhD, MPH, UCLA School of Public Health, WebMD. "The only thing we found that was not reported in the study is that non-smokers who live with smokers have a higher risk for widows because smoking cause cancer their husbands smokers die prematurely."
Although the study was "discredited" by many, for various reasons, there is an interesting contrast with the previous results smoking cause cancer.
In another study published in 1997 by the British Medical Journal smoking cause cancer entitled The accumulated evidence on lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke, research has concluded that "the smoke of snuff breathing other people is a cause of lung cancer "They arrived at this conclusion by examining the spouses living with smoking cause cancer a smoker for a long period of time and were" constantly "exposed to secondhand smoke.
And when it comes to tobacco use at work the study noted that "occupational exposure varies greatly and is difficult to measure smoking cause cancer." Thus, according to this study, even if a link to secondhand smoke and cancer is important, there is no data to support whether the amount of secondhand smoke at work is bad - it is a major challenge for the Ontario legislation.
Ultimately most people will agree that smoking is bad for you, but what you eat a bucket of fried chicken. The problem is that these smoking cause cancer reports say smoke cancer "cause" used.
In an editorial entitled smoking does not cause lung cancer, published in October 1999, published by the Journal of Theoretical Author: James P. Sideman, MD, said there are several factors that are cancer, but none of them is smoking cause cancer responsible for the "cause" of the disease
"The process of developing cancer is complex and multi factorial. Involves genetics, immune system, cellular irritation, smoking cause cancer DNA alteration, dose and duration of exposure, etc.. Some risk factors include the exposure to asbestos genetics, gender, HIV status, vitamin, diet pollution, shipbuilding and even just plain old lazy. When some of these factors combined can have a synergistic effect, smoking cause cancer but none of these risk factors are directly and independently responsible for "causing" lung cancer "
As stated in its editorial Sideman if these reports stated that passive smoking "increases the risk of developing cancer smoking cause cancer," maybe it would be a little easier to swallow. But that secondhand smoke causes cancer has no specific scientific value.
Health Canada, it even says they have no idea of withe amount of secondhand smoke is considered harmful "No scientific smoking cause cancer authority or health regulatory agency in the world have established a safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. " Yet, yet legislated.
Many argue that the smoking ban is a threat to our civil liberties. Another serious epidemic in this country and in many other parts of the world for that matter is obesity. Should we forbid people to eat cake, or order a main course? No, of course not. Why is it good for the government to tell you where smoking?
There is no smoking cause cancer doubt that the 50 are chemicals in secondhand smoke is harmful to a certain extent, but to influence people and make laws based on data that have been proven FALSE, is just too big to ignore.
In recent years, the smoking cause cancer debate secondhand smoke has been discussed and debated endlessly. Here in Ontario, Canada, the government recently passed a law to ban people from smoking in all public places, including bars and restaurants smoking cause cancer.
The new control law called snuff smoking ban in the province of Ontario, as well as those that prohibit smoking in public places smoking cause cancer, bans snuff smoking in your workplace too.
Similar legislation has also been introduced in many parts of the United States
There have been dozens of scientific studies linking second hand to everything from asthma to heart disease. However smoking cause cancer, the "effect" largest and most controversial of secondhand smoke has been its relationship with cancer.
But is there any scientific evidence that passive smoking causes cancer in non-smokers? The short answer is no.
One of the most smoking cause cancer used on the effects of secondhand smoke studies was conducted by Protection Agency (EPA) in a report entitled Respiratory effects of passive smoking: lung cancer and other diseases, published in 1992. On the basis of the information at this time, reports on the conclusion that secondhand smoke is responsible for 3,000 deaths in nonsmokers each smoking cause cancer year.
However, in 1998 smoking cause cancer, a federal court in the United States found that the EPA has shown no link between secondhand smoke and cancer. In addition, the court held that the EPA "..." cherry picked "data" to reach your predetermined conclusion. In other words, they lied smoking cause cancer.
And yet, even after a federal court ruled the report is bad complex organizations like the American Cancer Society and the smoking cause cancer American Lung Association use the EPA study as a primary source to prove that secondhand smoke smoke causes cancer.
Even Health Canada smoking cause cancer Web site in a report entitled Protection of secondhand smoke in Ontario: a review of the evidence on best practices, the main source of "data" has the same EPA study that was rejected by a Federal Court. However, this has been used as evidence that secondhand smoke causes cancer and should be banned, saying "any involuntary tobacco smoke exposure is harmful and should be smoking cause cancer removed."
Interestingly, several referenced in the Smoke Free Ontario site links were either broken or not connected to the reference article.
So even with a study smoking cause cancer that led to a conclusion based on insufficient data and predetermined conclusions, places like Ontario have yielded to political and public pressure to ban smoking in workplaces and public places to reduce the risk of cancer caused by secondhand smoke.
In a study published on 17 May 2003 smoking cause cancer, the British Medical Journal, the researchers found no link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer.
"We found no measurable smoking cause cancer effect of exposure to secondhand smoke and an increased risk of heart disease and lung cancer risk in nonsmokers - not at any time or at any level," lead researcher James Angstrom, PhD, MPH, UCLA School of Public Health, WebMD. "The only thing we found that was not reported in the study is that non-smokers who live with smokers have a higher risk for widows because smoking cause cancer their husbands smokers die prematurely."
Although the study was "discredited" by many, for various reasons, there is an interesting contrast with the previous results smoking cause cancer.
In another study published in 1997 by the British Medical Journal smoking cause cancer entitled The accumulated evidence on lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke, research has concluded that "the smoke of snuff breathing other people is a cause of lung cancer "They arrived at this conclusion by examining the spouses living with smoking cause cancer a smoker for a long period of time and were" constantly "exposed to secondhand smoke.
And when it comes to tobacco use at work the study noted that "occupational exposure varies greatly and is difficult to measure smoking cause cancer." Thus, according to this study, even if a link to secondhand smoke and cancer is important, there is no data to support whether the amount of secondhand smoke at work is bad - it is a major challenge for the Ontario legislation.
Ultimately most people will agree that smoking is bad for you, but what you eat a bucket of fried chicken. The problem is that these smoking cause cancer reports say smoke cancer "cause" used.
In an editorial entitled smoking does not cause lung cancer, published in October 1999, published by the Journal of Theoretical Author: James P. Sideman, MD, said there are several factors that are cancer, but none of them is smoking cause cancer responsible for the "cause" of the disease
"The process of developing cancer is complex and multi factorial. Involves genetics, immune system, cellular irritation, smoking cause cancer DNA alteration, dose and duration of exposure, etc.. Some risk factors include the exposure to asbestos genetics, gender, HIV status, vitamin, diet pollution, shipbuilding and even just plain old lazy. When some of these factors combined can have a synergistic effect, smoking cause cancer but none of these risk factors are directly and independently responsible for "causing" lung cancer "
As stated in its editorial Sideman if these reports stated that passive smoking "increases the risk of developing cancer smoking cause cancer," maybe it would be a little easier to swallow. But that secondhand smoke causes cancer has no specific scientific value.
Health Canada, it even says they have no idea of withe amount of secondhand smoke is considered harmful "No scientific smoking cause cancer authority or health regulatory agency in the world have established a safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. " Yet, yet legislated.
Many argue that the smoking ban is a threat to our civil liberties. Another serious epidemic in this country and in many other parts of the world for that matter is obesity. Should we forbid people to eat cake, or order a main course? No, of course not. Why is it good for the government to tell you where smoking?
There is no smoking cause cancer doubt that the 50 are chemicals in secondhand smoke is harmful to a certain extent, but to influence people and make laws based on data that have been proven FALSE, is just too big to ignore.
No comments:
Post a Comment