Is there really solid proof that second hand smoke causes cancer or is it still up for debate?
2006-08-31 17:10:55 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health ➔ Diseases & Conditions ➔ Cancer
No, there is NO credible proof at all. In fact I strongly suggest you look for recent studies that were just published by Harvard Medical School. The margin was SO small between children exposed to 2nd hand smoke and children who were not that developed cancer that it is not considered statistically different at all. Please do look it up. It was published last month and I'm pretty sure you can find it without much trouble.
2006-08-31 17:18:29 · answer #1 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋
lets see...brb after i research your question...
Environmental Tobacco Smoke) occurs when the smoke from one person's burning tobacco product (or the smoker's exhalation) is inhaled by others. There is controversy surrounding the health risks of long term exposure to second hand smoke, but the most recent studies confirm the health risks. Passive smoking is one of the key issues leading to smoking bans in workplaces, smoke-free restaurants, and public places.
"Passive smoking: secondhand smoke does cause respiratory disease...
cancer is a respiratory disease, but you can get/have a respiratory disease and not have/get cancer...bronkitus...pardon my spelling...i would say there is no SOLD proof that it WILL cause cancer...but it COULD...
i smoke but not around my nonsmokeing family and friends...respect
2006-09-01 00:15:20 · answer #2 · answered by GyVuPhaYs 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't know about causing cancer, but I believe it has some effects. I used to live with a smoker and I could feel some effects of the smoke - like a contact-high. When I was away from the smoke, I felt better.
So, if one can feel the effects of the nicotine second-hand, then it seems the physiological effects would be there too. Change in BP, vaso-constriction, possible artery damage after long-term exposure, etc. I firmly believe this.
2006-09-01 00:24:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
There were studies some time back that said that the smoke had to be at a certain temperature in order to do damage to the lungs. For some reason, no one ever talks about those studies. BTW, an ENT (ear, nose & throat doc) told me that anyone who claims to be allergic to smoke, doesn't know what they are talking about. Smoke is an irritant, not an allergen.
2006-09-01 00:18:15 · answer #4 · answered by mightymite1957 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes in the uk a well known tv presenter/DJ worked around the world working in clubs as a disc jockey. He died from lung cancer and never smoked a cigarrete in his life, This was proven that due to all the smoke in the clubs which he was inhaling he got the cancer. Passive smoking is thought to be more dangerous that smoking the cigarrette yourself.
2006-09-01 05:10:09 · answer #5 · answered by shelz042000 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well, if a person gets enough smoke to affect their lungs, then yeah, unfortunately, it can cause lung cancer. I hear that sometimes second hand smoke is worse because a person who doesn't smoke doesn't have the resistance or immunity against it.
2006-09-01 00:14:02 · answer #6 · answered by nessieexpress 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is NO solid proof that it causes cancer.
2006-09-01 00:16:50 · answer #7 · answered by fireman_4_69 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
------------- The Largest study on Second Hand Smoke ever done by Enstrom
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.”
“Enstrom has defended the accuracy of his study against what he terms ‘illegitimate criticism by those who have attempted to suppress and discredit it.’". (Wikipedia)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2164936/?tool=pmcentrez
------ Court rules that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is NOT a Class A carcinogen
http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/980717osteen.html
“There is evidence in the record supporting the accusation that EPA ‘cherry picked’ its data” … “EPA's excluding nearly half of the available studies directly conflicts with EPA's purported purpose for analyzing the epidemiological studies and conflicts with EPA's Risk Assessment Guidelines” (p. 72)
-------- OSHA will NOT regulate something that’s NOT hazardous
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=24602
“Air contaminants, limits employee exposure to several of the main chemical components found in tobacco smoke. In normal situations, exposures would not exceed these permissible exposure limits (PELs), and, as a matter of prosecutorial discretion, OSHA will not apply the General Duty Clause to ETS.”
Study about health & Smoking Bans – The National Bureau of Economic Research
http://www.nber.org/papers/w14790
“Workplace bans are not associated with statistically significant short-term declines in mortality or hospital admissions for myocardial infarction or other diseases.”
Dr. S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric and space physicist
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2011/01/03/secondhand-smoke-lung-cancer-and-global-warming-debate
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/07/the-real-reasons-behind-public-smoking-bans.html
Showtime television, "How the EPA, CDC, Lung Association, and etc." support their claims.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGApkbcaZK4
US National Cancer Institute researcher explains the frauds involved in secondhand smoke media reports
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K9gtMKB6X2o
Then the US Surgeon General went over all the studies to date in 2006 again and even though he went on public TV and announced "No safe level", the report itself showed exactly the opposite.
---The evidence is … not sufficient to infer a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke and an increased risk of stroke. (p. 13)
---The evidence is … not sufficient to infer a causal relationship between secondhand smoke exposure from parental smoking and the onset of childhood asthma.(p. 13)
---The evidence is inadequate to infer the presence or absence of a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke during infancy and childhood cancer.(p. 11)
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/report/executivesummary.pdf
2014-01-01 20:35:05 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The answer is definitely yes.
2006-09-01 01:10:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
You should go to this wesite for help
http://www.dontpoisonme.com/
2006-09-01 01:50:54 · answer #10 · answered by Dr. chen 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋