Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

One in ten NON-smokers will develop cancer...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:05 PM
Original message
One in ten NON-smokers will develop cancer...
Just thought you should know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
candy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Serious business,this non-smoking---serious business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I'm quiting non-smoking RIGHT NOW!
Damn. Who knew?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
candy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 08:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
26. Me too .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrGonzoLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. Non-smokers die every day
:o
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. S'truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. Well
fortunately, the other 90% will never grow old, never die.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
6. Thanks! I smoked for 20 years and I have that hanging over...
my head. I have had a few acquaintances die from lung cancer years after quitting. At age 45, the doctor said I had the lungs of an 18-year old but that's no guarantee, is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
7. Chances almost double if that non-smoker lives with a smoker
So there! :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I call "BS".
Not true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. You're right.
It's 'only' a 30% increase in the risk of lung cancer for the non smoker. Which is very significant.

And let's not forget the other cancers and diseases that passive smoking increases your risk for. Asthma, emphysema, many other cancers, pneumonia, bronchitis - the list goes on and on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Let's see what that means...

If you are a non-smoker you have 10 chances in 100 of dying of cancer.

If you are a non-smoker living with a smoker you have 30% greater, or 13 chance in 100 of dying of cancer. Yup. That's a BIG difference.

I once heard it said that if you survive long enough you WILL get cancer. No if's and's or but's. Most people get killed by something else before cancer gets around to them. Worldwide, 1 in 3 dies of infectious disease.

One reason cancer rates used to be so much lower in the "good old days" is that people died of influenza, pneumonia, tuberculosis, polio, apendicitis, etc. etc., before they had lived long enough to get cancer.

But the biggest problem with statistics is that they don't have any significance in specific individual cases. I had a non-smoking uncle die of lung cnacer in his 40's and a 2-pack a day (unfiltered) smoker great-uncle who lived to be a very strong and active 90 years old. Shit happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. WRONG.
Smoking is the single largest preventable cause of cancer in the world. Bar none.

Female smokers have a SIX TIMES higher risk of heart attack.

Smokers have a THREE TIMES higher risk of dying from a heart attack

Smokers have a FOUR TIMES risk of a striks.

In smokers lung cancer is diagnosed TEN TIMES more often than non smokers.

Risk of oral cancer in smokers is TWENTY SEVEN times higher

Risk of larynx cancer is TWELVE TIMES higher.

Second hand smoke is associated with: SIDS, bronchitis, pneumonia, asthma and ear infections in children.

Smoking is a cause for urinary cancer, bladder cancer, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, and cervical cancer.

Now let's talk about emphysema.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is the fourth leading killer in the United States.

Do you know what it's like to die of lung cancer or emphysema? You slowly, slowly, painfully, DROWN.

And I haven't even begun to mention the emotional and financial costs smokers place upon the world. If you think smoking is okay, you are getting your information from Repukes and the tobacco industry.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. He didn't say smoking is OK
he simply provided some statistics.

The fact is, most people who smoke will not develop cancer (at least not related to their smoking). Everybody agrees smoking is bad for you. But it's always better to know the true facts - not all smokers die from smoking-related illness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. No he didn't provide statistics.
He mocked statistics.

He said, sarcastically, that three more people is a 'huge difference'. Guess what - multiply 30% by 10,000,000 people and yes, that IS a truly huge difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. He discussed the difference
between 10% and 13%.

Many people are not very good at statistics, and a 30% increase of anything sounds huge, but when it's 30% of 10%, the increase is much less than people imagine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. It isn't as easy as "shit happens" either
Of course not all smokers die from smoking related illness, but smoking-related isn't just relegated to lung cancer and heart disease. Research is showing that smoking affects far more systems than previously thought.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. I agree
I'm not defending smoking. I'm not saying it's not very bad for you.

But that's no reason to overstate the case. The actual statistics are bad enough, but we should at least be honest about what they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I'm sorry if you feel I've overstated anything
It's tough when your brother is a cancer researcher and you hear about this constantly. My opinion may be biased, but I don't think it's out of line with the current data and research.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. I'm not saying you did
not at all.

But you must admit there are people who believe highly inflated numbers regarding the dangers of not just smoking, but LOTS of things.

A lot of people don't understand what it means when someone says that people living with a smoker have a 30% increased risk of lung cancer. It was explained above that it's the difference between 10% and 13% of the population. I imagine many people think the difference is much greater.

Similarly, one in eight smokers will develop lung cancer. I believe the general population probably thinks the actual figure is more like 6 in 8.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Oh, and it's not true that if you survive long enough you will get cancer.
My 97 year old grandfather never had it, nor did my 90 year old grandmothers OR my 80 year old grandfather.

And the 'specific individual cases' you state are anecdotal anomalies. Of course lung cancer isn't limited to smokers - those exposed to passive smoke and environmental carcinogens and toxins also develop it. But the fact remains that smoking is the number one totally preventable cause of cancer and heart disease.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dookus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. It is almost certain
that your grandfather had some form of prostate cancer at the time of his death. Almost every male has it past age 70 or so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lindacooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #20
28. Nope - he had an enlarged prostate, but no cancer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Worst Username Ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. 25%, not 50%
Edited on Thu Apr-07-05 06:18 PM by Worst Username Ever

Lung Cancer and Passive Smoking
Even people who don’t smoke can be at risk. In America passive smoking accounts for approximately 3,000 deaths from lung cancer each year. If a non smoker lives with a smoker, inhaling their second hand smoking increases their chances of getting lung cancer by 25%. Working in a smoky bar or restaurant increases the risk by 17%.


http://www.lung-cancer.ru.com/lung_cancer_causes.htm

Although that is just LUNG cancer. The carcinogens in cigarette smoke increase the likelihood of ALL types of cancer, so it would not surprise me it 50% is accurate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. You'd be wrong
Edited on Thu Apr-07-05 06:32 PM by Susang
~snip~

Children who are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke (passive smoking) are at a higher risk of developing lung cancer as adults, says a paper in this week's BMJ.
Those children exposed to passive smoking on a daily basis and for many hours are the most vulnerable ? facing over treble (3.63) the risk of those who grew up in smoke-free environments.

Children experiencing passive smoke a few times a week are one and a half (1.45) times more likely to develop lung cancer, and those exposed daily but not for many hours faced twice (2.08) the risk.

http://www.news-medical.net/?id=7560

Edited to include link to BMJ article: http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/330/7486/0
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/extract/330/7486/265
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/330/7486/277
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Misunderestimator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. Well, that may be true of children...
but he's not wrong about the risk to adults with second-hand smoke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nevernose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
23. For lung cancer, it's one in three are non-smokers
Of course, that still means the odds are great that if you smoke, it'll kill you, but let's at least get the numbers right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
25. All I'm trying to say is...

... I've heard so many people say, in effect, "If you smoke you WILL die of lung cancer." And that's just not true. I'm not defending smoking, I'm defending truth and accuracy over hyperbole and hysteria; honest assesment of the risk over fear-mongering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftPeopleFinishFirst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
27. Oh
So that makes it okay to smoke? I see.

Thanks for clearing that up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-05 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
29. And 100% of Nonsmokers will die!
Eventually.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC