Posted on 09/22/2009 3:38:49 PM PDT by TennesseeGirl
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Could it be good news for smokers? Current and past-smokers with coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, or peripheral artery disease have less than half the cardiovascular mortality than never-smokers, the initial findings from a new study suggest.
But don't be so quick to tell your patients to light up: After accounting for potential confounders, the association was not statistically significant.
"The relationship between smoking habit and outcome in patients with established arterial disease remains controversial," Dr. M. Monreal, of Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, Barcelona, Spain, and colleagues write in the September issue of the European Journal of Internal Medicine.
"Some studies have found that smoking may be associated with a better outcome among patients with acute coronary disease," they note. "As for patients with cerebrovascular disease or peripheral artery disease, there is little information on the influence of smoking on outcome."
...Compared to never-smokers, current and past-smokers were younger, more often male, and more likely to have chronic lung disease. Diabetes, hypertension, and heart failure were less common in current- and past-smokers. Excerpted.
(Excerpt) Read more at rtmagazine.com ...
Pretty obvious this study wasn't done in the USA.
Get OUT!
And we will never see this in the SRM either.
Perhaps because they weigh less?
Money quote.
Not bragging but have been smoking for over 50 years and just recently developed unstable angina...have had about 5 attacks in the last year...NTG takes care of it....Lung cancer does not run in the family...I think genetics predisposition has a lot to do with cancers...With my family history, it G I cancers.....
Help save Social Security and defeat National Health Care, Light up!!
LOL I am doing my part, even roll my own....
Those stats should scare the crap out of anyone
Wonder if it's occurred to anyone that there might be a correlation between the smoking hysterics and global warming hoax????
Same tactics, different subject....
Anecdotal, of course, but here goes...
My beloved husband has no bad habits. Doesn’t drink, never smoked, etc. He now has Parkinson’s.
I have been smoking for well over 40 years... rarely have colds, flu, or other minor illnesses. Second hand smoke doesn’t seem to be very effective against Parkinson’s, I guess.
Perhaps because they weigh less?
Exactly we know both of those diseases are affected by weight and smokers burn more calories due to the nicotine in their bodies.
Of course lets not bring Lung Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, or the plethora of other diseases where the increased risk of developing due to smoking is hundreds of times that of the non smoker into the conversation.
I’m 59, have smoked for 45 years. I have so much nicotine in my system, cancer cells can’t survive. “cept for age related aches and pains, am truly healthy.
smoke’en if you got’em.
I restarted smoking one day when they first started outlawing smoking in restaurants somewhere - glad I did because I dont believe 90% of the antismoking propaganda.
Sure, if you smoke too much (I average 5 a day), it wont be healthy but I know lots of pack a day people who have far less problems than the teatotallers.
“Of course lets not bring Lung Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, or the plethora of other diseases where the increased risk of developing due to smoking is hundreds of times that of the non smoker “
That simply is not true.
Pancreatic, colon, and breast cancer deaths are lower among smokers.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/brimelow1.html
Here’s another little article to stimulate conversation.
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/diesel_lung_cancer.html
Are Diesels More Dangerous than Cigarettes as a Cause of Lung Cancer?
So far, most of the money given to the cancer industry has been spent looking for a cure for cancer. But it seems that cancer is a disease which has no cure. Traditionally, with solid tumours, cut it out has been the only real option - and it still is. Given that, wouldn’t it be better to concentrate more on preventing it?
Oxford’s cancer expert, Sir Richard Doll, writing in The American Journal of Public Health , said that increasing cancer mortality “can be accounted for in all industrialized countries by the spread of cigarette smoking.” Unfortunately, this statement tends to be believed, despite the evidence against it.
If smoking were a cause of any cancer, lung cancer is the most likely one. It was Sir Richard Doll who implicated smoking in a study published in 1964 - despite his own published data from that study which showed that people who inhaled cigarette smoke had less lung cancer than those who didn’t!
The real cause of lung cancer, according to another Oxford research scientist, Dr. Kitty Little, is diesel fumes. And the evidence here is much more persuasive. It includes the facts that:
tobacco smoke contains no carcinogens, while diesel fumes contain four known carcinogens;
that lung cancer is rare in rural areas, but common in towns;
that cancers are more prevalent along the routes of motorways;
that the incidence of lung cancer has doubled in non-smokers over past decades;
and that there was less lung cancer when we, as a nation, smoked more.
Pointing out that there has been evidence for over 40 years that smoking does not cause lung cancer, Dr Little says:
“Since the effect of the anti-smoking campaign has been to prevent the genuine cause from being publicly acknowledged, there is a very real sense in which we could say that the main reason for those 30,000 deaths a year from lung cancer is the anti-smoking campaign itself”.
There’s more at the link.
very interesting - I think I once read that diesel fumes contain ultra small particles that resist cleansing by the lungs just like asbestos.
Just watch a heavy smoker dying and listen to them gasping for their last breath. That’s a lesson you won’t forget.
The 2010 US spec diesels use some amazing particulate filters on the exhaust.
The tailpipe is literally white glove clean.
Of course this all comes at a high price to purchase - 7 to 10 grand on a new truck.
“Of course lets not bring Lung Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer, or the plethora of other diseases where the increased risk of developing due to smoking is hundreds of times that of the non smoker into the conversation.”
Total bunk, and exactly like global warming. A smoker is 100 times less likely to have any of these medical problems as non-smokers.
Hank.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You are on crack if you believe that!
If you smoke you are 2-3 times more likely to develop pancreatic cancer than non-smoker. You are pushing aids denier nonsense if you are claiming otherwise.
Wow, well now I know how holocaust deniers exist.
Take your denials of pancreatic cancer and smoking and tell to Patrick Swayze.
I see that you dont deny the other maladys that are less prevalent for smokers - I will get back to you on pancreatic cancer.
Just watch a non-smoker dying and listen to them gasping for their last breath. That’s a lesson you won’t forget.
Hank
They started with roughly the same age separation among the 2501 patients, all of whom had cardiovascular presentations; it doesn’t look as though there is much to be taken from this study on balance other than aggresive smoking-cessation programs might be de-emphasised among such patients.
Don’t make up numbers just to try and make a point.
my bad - it is prostate cancer that has a lower incidence with cigarette smokers.
That’s study doesn’t have any controls and no protocol at all.If there was any such general effect it would have been seen nationwide in the past twenty five years as the percentage of smokers has dropped by half while the heart attack numbers reflect demographic growth in general.
Perhaps a true study merits funding just to ‘clear the air.’
I to have been a long time smoker and with the news about the swine flu, I figured no flu virus could get through all the junk in my lungs....I am not worried about it..:O) Like you I rarely have flu or colds, my problem is being dumb and pushing and lifting things I shouldn't and re injure an old rib problem...an old lady trying to push a garden tractor out of 3 inches of mud, is one dumb old lady...I won't do that again and I heard something pop and got knocked off my feet in the middle of the field...the only good part was I was within view of the road, so if I couldn't get up, someone would see me...after about 1 minute I could get to my feet, but couldn't stand up straight...made it back to the house and nursed bad ribs for about 10 days...as I said, dumb...:O)
Wish all good things for you and your husband...he has a difficult problem to deal with as do you.....
Hope your mom does well...CHF can be controlled...I use to do home health care 5 days a week for a sweet old gal that was 94 and had CHF. If the doctor hasn't told you, watch for slight shortness of breath, also swollen ankles and if you press on the ankle and it leaves an indentation for a few seconds, thats another sign that perhaps she should see the doctor again....I had my lady in ER twice and they would give her Lasix IV push, she'd pee a lot and they would send her home....She was not even aware that anything was wrong, but as we sat an talked, I could tell she was a little short of breath. (SOB in medical terms) when I asked to see her ankles, they were slightly swollen...Her family doctor doubled her lasix prescription..
I survived because of the “smoker’s paradox”.
Smoking constricts the arteries, revealing a narrowing of the system before a full fledged heart attack occurs.
Why would I quit?
That does not explain lung cancer in non smokers and pancreatic cancer is not associated with smoking at all unless you believe all the anti-smoking nazi's.
Even the UN (yuk) did a study of second hand smoke and found no correlation between it and any disease...that study was quickly deleted from the news by the prissies that want to tell others how to live.. Besides, if smoking does shorten your life its at the end of your years, so no diapers, nursing homes or senility...
Smoke um if you got um...
That has got to be one of the stupidest comments on smoking I have ever heard...
I worked on an oncology unit...Have you ever seen a young man die of acute leukemia, how about an alcoholic dying of cirrhosis of the liver...I have seen liver cancer patients last hours bleeding from ever hole in their body including their eyes. Changing the bedding and finding clots as big as your fist....and they are conscious until they take their last breath...I have seen a 7 year old child die of brain cancer, a 5 year old with Wilms tumor..If your going to mouth off, know something first.....
Yep, you made one really stupid comment.....
That simply is not true.
You and your sister have my sympathy, because taking care of your own mother is a tough job...and to you guys you will always be her little kids....(I keep having to remind myself how old my kids are when I want to open my mouth) Its not easy. :O) and they are all 40 or over...
I quit a year ago after 50 years of smoking, I figured I was pushing my luck.
I still chew occasionally, I've seen no reports yet from the nanny staters that second hand spit is harmful.
I remember a few years ago, there were several people on FR that would often post on the smoking threads “pufflist” and maintain that smoking was harmless.
Sadly, they no longer can make such comments.
And on many of the pufflist threads there are often comments such as ‘my 98 year old aunt has smoked eight packs a day since she was nine and ran a sub three hour Boston Marathon last year.’
In my prior post, I mentioned that I quit a little over a year ago after 50 years of smoking. I am in good health but as I also mentioned I thought it was time to quit pushing my luck.
Too many stats for anyone to credibly deny that smoking is harmful generally but government interference is what most people object to. Such as outrageous taxes and now some localities are even banning smoking out doors in certain areas.
Comments such as you describe were and probably still are common but they mean nothing. Whistling past the grave yard perhaps.
Adults don’t smoke. Teenagers smoke and then become adults after it’s way too late to quit.
So what’s your story? Ex-smoker?
I corrected myself - it is prostate cancer to which smokers are resistant.
My grandfather died at 88 after smoking for about 69 years.
Having said that, anyone who routinely, voluntarily inhales hot ashes is foolish. And anyone who pays good money to do it is an imbecile.
The point is that there is no harm from smoking in moderation and that the nanny state villifies any amount of smoke at the expense of finding real cures.
For instance, my wife had 130 cholesterol and 110 blood pressure as opposed to my 300 and 140 yet she needed two stents. It was blamed on her smoking a pack a day for 30 years but now it appears that might be propaganda.
Personnaly, after much “alternative” research on places with no koolaid like FR, I have come to the conclusion that 10 years of dental problems when she was young is the cause of her plaque.
So, lets put down the koolaid and look for real problems.
BTW, I read of a study where smoking miners who were exposed to radon had lower lung cancer than those that did not smoke at all. This was good up to a pack a day but if they smoked more than that, they had a higher incidence than those that did not smoke.
And that is born out by people that I know - 4 died of lung cancer and only 1 was a smoker.
You didn’t read my post in context. Unlike you, I don’t get to see people dying every day and would expect a more informed comment based on your experience. The person I am talking about had acute leukemia and was also an alcoholic. He was also a lifelong smoker.
You are obviously a lab worker or aid rather than a doctor or surgeon, otherwise you would know exactly what I am talking about. Heavy smoking makes prolonging the patients life more hopeless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.