Hey, Sonya, you need more than just a yes or no answer here. So let me give it a try.
First, awesome job on quitting, you cut your chances of getting cancer from smoke inhalation and direct exposure to poisons by 70 % at least. Nice going. You can still get cancer, you can absolutely get it from second hand smoke, for those who don't believe that, well, you need to do some reading, I feel sorry for you. So, if you are asking if you have affected your chances the answer is yes, you have. You have less chance now of getting cancer than you did when you were smoking. You smoked for a year and stopped. A lot of it depends on how much you smoked and for how long. If you weren't a major chain smoker and you quit, you should be fine. Unfortunately there are other kinds of cancer out there, but you shouldn't live your life just trying to avoid cancer types. You should take good care of yourself and enjoy the good things in life while you can. My father is still smoking, he has lung and skin cancer and emphysema.
On Mary Jane: No, not linked to cancer causing, though used as a treatment for cancer. MJ is still not good for you though, it impares your judgement and while it has claimed less lives than alcholol and tobacco, it has still claimed it's fair share by those who drive while under the influence. MJ prevents oxygen from getting you your brain and kills brain cells as a direct effect. Your brain will heal some from the effect, but not all the way. So good for you on quitting and don't worry so much about the rest. Enjoy your life!
2006-06-23 09:18:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by thewildeman2 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
I'm glad you quit smoking - congratulations!! The answer is yes, anyone can get lung cancer - even non-smokers. Some of it is genetic, some of it is from chemicals we work with or are exposed to in the environment. I think that when the powers that be finally decide just what does cause cancer, we may actually have a cure.
2006-06-23 09:09:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Decoy Duck 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Marijuana has not been shown to cause lung cancer, but smoking and second-hand smoke exposure both do.
Any moron that says second-hand smoke is harmless should hear a little story. A diner waitress who worked for thirty years in a smoky environment, but never smoked a cigarette in her life, died of lung cancer a little less than a decade ago.
Second-hand smoke contains more carcinogens than even smoke inhaled from a cigarette. Because it does not pass through a filter and because of the difference in burning temperature between the two, second-hand smoke contains more tar and cancer-causing agents than first-hand smoke.
While I doubt you are at a substantially higher risk for diseases like lung cancer and heart attack, I would not recommend taking up smoking or drug use once again.
I applaud your determination and success.
2006-06-23 09:15:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tenor1 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can get lung cancer even if you've never smoked at all (like Christopher Reeve's wife). If you smoke, your chances go up. If you quit smoking, your chances start going back down again. The longer you go without smoking, the lower your chance of lung cancer.
The hard part is finding some new vice to replace it with (sigh).
2006-06-23 09:08:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Steve H 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is possible to get lung cancer without smoking. So yes, you can get lung cancer. Smoking just increases the chance of lung cancer.
2006-06-23 09:07:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by tikuiaku 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes even people who do not smoke can get lung cancer. Smoking however increases your chances of getting it and I think you did the right thing by quitting. It will definately decrease your chances. Good job.
2006-06-23 09:10:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by amalyn 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If smoking is factored out, lung cancer is still the leading cancer killer in the U.S. The primary cause is pesticides is foods and the environment. In a word, yes, you can still get lung cancer even though you have reduced your risk by quitting.
2006-06-23 09:08:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Doc1213 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
That deal is rediculous!!! Being the parent of a teen who has abused the same drug and seeing what he goes through I would never allow any child to try it. Sure there are many people who will say this is a harmless drug and I do agree that more violence and car accidents are commited under the influence of alcohol, but still it doesn't make it okay. Parents should not give children the impression that doing drugs is alright. Do not accept any deals from him. You are the parent not him. My son began smoking weed at age 11. He is 16 now, got in alot of trouble with the law last year for some stupid things his friends and he were high, has stolen things, sold his stuff and done other things against the law to support his habit. He is now in lock up. Not a place I am sure you would like your son to end up one day because you allowed him to do this. I know that children will do what they will do, but you need to send the right message to him.
2016-03-27 02:17:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. People get lung cancer who have never smoked.
2006-06-23 09:07:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sean 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
nope,well not because of your smoking history. I know three persons that have been smoking for numerous years including my uncle that has been smoking pot for 20yrs and I ain't seeing no cancer (yet). The others are cigarrette smokers and they've been smoking for many more years than you've been, so I don't see why you should be concerned.
2006-06-23 09:37:42
·
answer #10
·
answered by Elandw 2
·
0⤊
0⤋