Come on thats bullshit no it dont, its rare to get lung cancer in your 30s and 40s,
The percentage of lung cancers that are diagnosed at each age is as follows (for example, for every 100 cases of lung cancer, 20 of them will be diagnosed in people age 55 to 64):
Age 20 to 34 – 0.2%
Age 35 to 44 – 1.7%
Age 45 to 54 – 8.8%
Age 55 to 64 – 20.0%
Age 65 to 74 – 31.3%
Age 75 to 84 – 29.1%
Age 85 and older – 8%
My brother suffers from a bowl disease similar to chrome’s disease and the doctor told him smokers dont get the disease. But i dont know how much i believe of that,
smoking is bad but its an accumulation, most things are bad for you if you take them too much for too long like drinking or fatty food, i bet if you did a test on two kids at 14 years old, and started one on 20 fags a day for 40 years and the other 14 year old kid on big macs and fries every day for 40 years both are gonna have equally bad health problems. Maybe the government should put pictures of dead fat corpses on big mac meals like they put corpses on fag packets.
I can’t answer that definitively, I’m repeating the information available from a highly researched area of health. There’s a lot of anti-smoking propoganda that seems pointless to me because the facts paint a grim portrait already. Smoking reduces everyone’s life span.
I saw some of this. But it is recent. Clearly the damage done from smoking leaves people susceptible to other diseases.
Reduces your risk of developing one form of cancer, and increases your chance of developing all sort of other diseases.
Yes, and smoking also makes you cool. But there’s still a price to pay in the end.
This could apply to all sorts of diseases. If a cure for lung cancer is discovered, all those smokers who no longer die from lung cancer will die from heart or lung disease, or other cancers, or organ failures.
Are you terminally dense, or just as incapable of reading comprehension as you are of grammar and punctuation? Read the statement again and look at the numbers you quoted. Lung cancer starts to show up in statical quantities from the late thirties onward, increasing as time proceeds, such that by the time most people elect to stop smoking lung and other smoking-correlated cancers are already showing up in a coincident age band.
Where’s the proof. I bet you’re one of these nut jobs that wants smoking banned from parks even though you get thousands of buses and cars driving passed the park every day.
Smoking in moderation is not particularly more harmful than anything else done in moderation that has the potential to be unhealthy from less moderate practice. But the more addictive a substance is, the less moderation is likely to be practiced. And nicotine is highly addictive. So comparing it to fast food is pointless. And the effect of nicotine addiction makes it an almost binary choice in reality.
I thought the main reasons for banning smoking in parks came down to ecology (litter, fire hazard), not so much the health of the park-goers. Not all smokers litter, obviously, and I would assume that very few cause fires, but the litter alone is a big enough issue to explain why it would be a concern to park boards. That anti-smokers support these bans for health reasons or any other reasons—just icing on the cake.
That’s true for certain values of “moderation”, so I suppose my comment was unclear. Smoking a pack of cigarettes every two days will lead to increased mortality after a few decades. Eating a Big Mac every two days won’t, assuming it’s part of a balanced diet ™.
Well, I would have considered it load a crap that banning smoking from a public park was just plain silly. Until I went to a theme park (Six Flags?) in Virginia. It was a hot, humid, windless day with lots of smokers. Had a great time. While driving home, however, I kept noticing whiffs of tobacco smoke. I smelled my shirt and WTH? It reeked. I asked everyone else if they smelled it in their clothes. It was unanimous. Threw it the laundry basket. A few days later, doing laundry the smell was still quite distinct.
I for one welcome Ban-the-Smokers-from-Public-Places Overlords.
I am not a smoker myself but i dont mind the smell of tobacco, surely the smell of tobacco was suppose to be quite nice wasn’t it. And thats why the Indians started smoking it. If it smelt horrible no one would of ever smoked it.
[mod note]
This comment is out of line for GQ. I’m not issuing a warning, but you need to back off a bit.
[/mod note]
[/QUOTE]
Excuse me what is out of line, someone called me terminally dense and said i couldnt read or spell is that also out of line or is that acceptable. Or do most mods just like to pick on the new guy. You need to lighten up a bit.