Posted on 10/17/2006 1:09:34 PM PDT by trumandogz
TUESDAY, Oct. 17 (HealthDay News) -- A new study finds that at least 1 in every 4 smokers will develop progressive and incurable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a much higher risk than previously believed.
COPD is a respiratory disease that results in blocked air flow to the lungs and grows progressively worse.
For this study, published online in the journal Thorax, researchers at Hvidovre Hospital analyzed data on 8,000 men and women, ages 30 to 60. All were monitored for 25 years as part of the Copenhagen City Heart Study.
At the start of the study, all the participants' lungs were healthy and working normally. However, over the course of the 25 years, the lungs of almost all the male non-smokers continued to function normally, compared to 60 percent of men who continued to smoke.
Among women, 90 percent of non-smokers still had healthy lungs at the end of 25 years, compared to 70 percent of smokers.
Overall, 25 percent of the participants developed moderate or severe COPD over the 25 years. Persistent smokers were six times more likely to develop COPD than non-smokers.
During the 25 years, there were 2,900 deaths in the study group. Of those deaths, 109 were directly attributable to COPD, and nearly all those deaths were in people who were active smokers at the start of the study. Only two non-smokers died of COPD.
The study also found a sharp decline in the risk of COPD among people who stopped smoking soon after the start of the study. Over the 25 years, none of these ex-smokers developed severe COPD.
"So you're suggesting smoking doesn't cause lung cancer?"
I never suggested anything, I asked a pointed question based on fact. Feel free to take a whack at coming up with an anser. Here it is again.
Why is the highest per capita smoking population in the world also the lowest per capita heart and lung disease incidence population in the world?
You clearly do not understand that "righteous" and "christian" are two different words. In addition, keep going on with the red herring arguments. It shows that you have no tenable position.
Shhh, facts mean nothing.
"Nobody in their right mind doubts that smoking causes lung cancer -- no causal link has ever been more conslusively established by more scientists doing more research."
Then simply provide the reason why some non smokers get lung cancer and not all smokers get lung cancer.
You were asked: "Isn't it great we get to choose?"
You answered: "No. Not if I have to pay for your heart-lung machine, or your chemotherapy or your tracheotomy. Your addiction hurts all of us."
And now it is clear that we have a fascist in our midst. The clear solution you present to problems caused by socialist policies is fascism, with your ilk setting the standard. You are an enemy of this Republic and of individual liberty.
"Another tragic side effect of sheep-like behavior is that it dulls the wit."
Good one, you're my hero!
Just willing to make that sacrifice for you. Without us, you may well be out of a job.....
"Surely Shaw meant spending it on something of merit, and not tobacco."
You sure? What makes you think your opinions should be the dictator of other people's behaviour?
"It is absolutely their right to puff away, just as it is my right to defend my health and quality of life."
Neither of those rights are inherent. The only right that is inherent is for the owner of the property to make the choice to cater to your preferences or to a smoker's preferences. If the owner choses to cater to a smoker, you have no right that you claim above.
"I actually consider it unChristian to AVOID WARNING a brother overtaken in a fault, as Scripture exhorts."
You and your attitude are precisely why I left the seminary and the church. I would prefer to let people be guided by God thru the Holy Spirit than to sit in human judgement. What makes your guidance more valuable than the Holy Spirit's?
Thanks for your comments.
"I have some fantasies that some of my humble words may nudge them over the line."
You may want to re-read the thread and then find another way to describe them. Humble they are not.
Lame.
Why, thanks; the feeling is mutual!
I never said that smokers were filthy. I called the habit filthy, which it is. I myself smoked for almost 25 years. It was a filthy habit when I smoked as well.
I'm sorry. It doesn't appear that I am getting anywhere...and, in the meantime, my friend is still suspended. :(
I am finished with that one. I am not going to get into a whizzing contest with the likes of him.....
I was not around to see Toby's comments, and I can only assume that they were very offensive. That said, no one has ever been able to explain to me how the attacking anti's get away with all sorts of stuff, to include taking the Lord's name in vein, then they don't get admonished. I have yet to understand how they get away with it.
I suppose it is not allowed to respond in kind when one feels personally attacked on these threads. I would inquire directly to the mods, but I don't want to end up banned myself....
We fellow Freepers see through YOU too, and it's not a pretty picture!
I still have no idea what he's talking about......
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.