Quote:
|
I don't care if you smoke yourself to death but I don't want you smoking me to death.
|
You do know your chances of dieing from secondhand smoke is less than being struck by a falling meteorite. But hey, we all gotta believe in something. How's those government mind probes?
There is always two sides to any story, and most only care to listen to what they want to believe.
Here is the flipside to the anti-smokers story.
Source:
The Case Against Smoking Bans - Heart Disease Quote:
The biological plausibility of passive smoking effects on cardiovascular disease has been the subject of some discussion...There are limited data both to support and refute these hypotheses [based on the action of carbon monoxide and nicotine as they affect smokers] but exposures from passive smoke are generally thought to be at concentrations below those at which any physiological changes would occur...
In 1981 and again in 1988, the American Cancer Society did two major US studies (CPS-1 and CPS-2) and "major" means major: the first studied 1 million people, the second. 1.2. In addition to looking into the correlations of secondhand smoke and lung cancer, it also looked for links to heart disease. And found no connection. In either study.
-"Environmental Tobacco Smoke And Mortality," Lee; Karger, 1992
- also LeVois and Layard, "Publication Bias in the Environmental Tobacco Smoke/Coronary Heart Disease Epidemiologic Literature," Regul Toxicol Pharmacol, 1995; 21
Further, the subjects from CPS-1 continued to be followed through 1998, for a total of 39 years. Focusing on a large (35,561 subject) subset of California never-smokers married to smokers for the full period, a statistical analysis, peer-reviewed and published in the British Medical Journal in 2003, repeated these results-- showing incontrovertibly (0.97 @ 95% confidence) that there was no increased risk of coronary heart disease from lifelong exposure to secondhand smoke. |