Author: polaris1120

Study: Cigarettes kill, but don't tell smokers [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 1

Post time 2010-5-27 12:42:59 |Display all floors
thanks that was informative

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 1

Post time 2010-5-27 12:44:13 |Display all floors
btw If smoking cigarettes kills you.....Why is it legal to buy murder?



Stop Smoking Benefits __________
http://stopsmokinghabits.com/social-benefits.html

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2010-6-5 18:03:51 |Display all floors
The World Secondhand smoke myth up in flames




They have created a fear that is based on nothing.

May 31, 2010

World-renowned pulmonologist, president of the prestigious Research Institute Necker for the last decade, Professor Philippe Even, now retired, tells us that he’s convinced of the absence of harm from passive smoking. A shocking interview.

Translated by Iro Cyr from the French original interview found HERE.

What do the studies on passive smoking tell us?
PHILIPPE EVEN. There are about a hundred studies on the issue. First surprise: 40% of them claim a total absence of harmful effects of passive smoking on health. The remaining 60% estimate that the cancer risk is multiplied by 0.02 for the most optimistic and by 0.15 for the more  pessimistic … compared to a risk multiplied by 10 or 20 for active smoking! It is therefore negligible. Clearly, the harm is either nonexistent, or it is extremely low.

It is an indisputable scientific fact. Anti-tobacco associations report 3 000-6 000 deaths per year in France ...
I am curious to know their sources. No study has ever produced such a result.

Many experts argue that passive smoking is also responsible for cardiovascular disease and other asthma attacks. Not you?
They don’t base it on any solid scientific evidence. Take the case of cardiovascular diseases: the four main causes are obesity, high cholesterol, hypertension and diabetes. To determine whether passive smoking is an aggravating factor, there should be a study on people who have none of these four symptoms. But this was never done. Regarding chronic bronchitis, although the role of active smoking is undeniable, that of passive smoking is yet to be proven. For asthma, it is indeed a contributing factor ... but not greater than pollen!

The purpose of the ban on smoking in public places, however, was to protect non-smokers. It was thus based on nothing?
Absolutely nothing! The psychosis began with the publication of a report by the IARC, International Agency for Research on Ca

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2010-6-6 03:05:26 |Display all floors
Please excuse the double posting - sth went wrong while sendíng...

The World Secondhand smoke myth up in flames
They have created a fear that is based on nothing.

May 31, 2010

World-renowned pulmonologist, president of the prestigious Research Institute Necker for the last decade, Professor Philippe Even, now retired, tells us that he’s convinced of the absence of harm from passive smoking. A shocking interview.

Translated by Iro Cyr from the French original interview found HERE.

What do the studies on passive smoking tell us?
PHILIPPE EVEN. There are about a hundred studies on the issue. First surprise: 40% of them claim a total absence of harmful effects of passive smoking on health. The remaining 60% estimate that the cancer risk is multiplied by 0.02 for the most optimistic and by 0.15 for the more  pessimistic … compared to a risk multiplied by 10 or 20 for active smoking! It is therefore negligible. Clearly, the harm is either nonexistent, or it is extremely low.

I am curious to know their sources. No study has ever produced such a result.

Many experts argue that passive smoking is also responsible for cardiovascular disease and other asthma attacks. Not you?
They don’t base it on any solid scientific evidence. Take the case of cardiovascular diseases: the four main causes are obesity, high cholesterol, hypertension and diabetes. To determine whether passive smoking is an aggravating factor, there should be a study on people who have none of these four symptoms. But this was never done. Regarding chronic bronchitis, although the role of active smoking is undeniable, that of passive smoking is yet to be proven. For asthma, it is indeed a contributing factor ... but not greater than pollen!

The purpose of the ban on smoking in public places, however, was to protect non-smokers. It was thus based on nothing?
Absolutely nothing! The psychosis began with the publication of a report by the IARC, International Agency for Research on Cancer, which depends on the WHO (Editor's note: World Health Organization). The report released in 2002 says it is now proven that passive smoking carries serious health risks, but without showing the evidence. Where are the data? What was the methodology? It's everything but a scientific approach. It was creating fear that is not based on anything.

Why would anti-tobacco organizations wave a threat that does not exist?
The anti-smoking campaigns and higher cigarette prices having failed, they had to find a new way to lower the number of smokers. By waving the threat of passive smoking, they found a tool that really works: social pressure. In good faith, non-smokers felt in danger and started to stand up against smokers. As a result, passive smoking has become a public health problem, paving the way for the Evin Law and the decree banning smoking in public places. The cause may be  good,  but I do not think it is good to legislate on a lie. And the worst part is that it does not work: since the entry into force of the decree, cigarette sales are rising again.

Why not speak up earlier?
As a civil servant, dean of the largest medical faculty in France, I was held to confidentiality. If I had deviated from official positions, I would have had to pay the consequences. Today, I am a free man.
-Le Parisien

Second Hand smoke may have a bad smell but is it realy that dangerous as we are told ?
“If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.”

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2010-6-6 20:47:27 |Display all floors

Reply #1 polaris1120's post

A doctor who has been studying  lung cancer  once told me that smoking does great damage to health, I totally agree with him.

The funny thing is, it is when he was smoking that he spoke those words.

So............... I dont give a damn...
时运不济.....

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2010-6-6 21:15:36 |Display all floors
Originally posted by tomyli at 2010-6-5 18:03
The World Secondhand smoke myth up in flames




They have created a fear that is based on nothing.

May 31, 2010

World-renowned pulmonologist, president of the prestigious Research Insti ...



thanks for the expert opinion of an arrogant, narcissistic, french pervert, who thinks cigarettes are "a lot like women", who's also retired and therefore cannot be sued for taking money to give fake opinions

in reality, being exposed to any second hand smoke at all, even once, increases your risk of stroke

in the future, please refrain from posting french opinions
-1337

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 4

Post time 2010-6-8 01:50:13 |Display all floors
.. even once :-) Sorry Sir, even eating a cookie once in my live will theroretically increase my risk of stroke. Just think about Trans fat and Acrylamide.

Just in case you are interested ;-)

http://www.data-yard.net/43/1057.pdf

Source: School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1772, USA James E Enstrom researcher, Department of Preventive
Medicine, State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY 11794-8036
“If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there.”

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.