Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: VeniVidiVici
How do they blame lung cancer on somebody who quit smoking 25 years before they got it?

It's not an on-off switch. Having smoked at all dramatically increases your chance of getting lung cancer. The more and the longer you smoke, the greater that chance increases. Quitting helps limit the increase in risk, but it doesn't eliminate it.

160 posted on 10/17/2006 6:41:23 PM PDT by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: Alter Kaker
The more and the longer you smoke, the greater that chance increases. Quitting helps limit the increase in risk, but it doesn't eliminate it.

Why? What can possibly change at the cellular level to affect the body 25 years later? And how can they blame it on smoking and not, say, air pollution or Three Mile Island?

I'm not saying smoking doesn't cause it, I'm drilling down here.

164 posted on 10/17/2006 6:44:21 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (In God we trust. All others we monitor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson